On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 06:43:31AM +0800, Inochi Amaoto wrote: > On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 08:11:15PM GMT, Conor Dooley wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 06:25:49AM +0800, Inochi Amaoto wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 05:13:43PM GMT, Conor Dooley wrote: > > > > On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 06:24:34AM +0800, Inochi Amaoto wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Sep 09, 2024 at 03:41:10PM GMT, Conor Dooley wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, Aug 31, 2024 at 06:38:40AM +0800, Inochi Amaoto wrote: > > > > > > > Add basic pinctrl driver for Sophgo CV1800 series SoCs. > > > > > > > This patch series aims to replace the previous patch from Jisheng [1]. > > > > > > > Since the pinctrl of cv1800 has nested mux and its pin definination > > > > > > > is discrete, it is not suitable to use "pinctrl-single" to cover the > > > > > > > pinctrl device. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This patch require another patch [2] that provides standard attribute > > > > > > > "input-schmitt-microvolt" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The v4 version is from [3] > > > > > > > > > > > > Which version of this ended up in linux-next? I see a link to v4 in > > > > > > what's been applied, but this v5 was sent before that code was > > > > > > committed. > > > > > > > > > > > > Either way, what's been applied and what's here produce warnings: > > > > > > cv1812h.dtsi:19.28-24.5: Warning (simple_bus_reg): /soc/pinctrl@3008000: simple-bus unit address format error, expected "3001000" > > > > > > cv1800b.dtsi:18.28-23.5: Warning (simple_bus_reg): /soc/pinctrl@3008000: simple-bus unit address format error, expected "3001000" > > > > > > > > > > > > It's just a copy-paste error I would imagine, but please send a fix. > > > > > > > > > > Yes, it is like some copy-paste error, I will fix it. > > > > > > > > I'd rather you had sent some follow-up patches, than rebase your tree at > > > > this point in the cycle. I assume you hadn't yet sent that stuff in a PR > > > > to Arnd? > > > > > > > Yes, the pinctrl dts needs binding header, which is taken by Linus. > > > So we hadn't sent them. This is why I sent a new version to fix this. > > > > Oh, I'm surprised that you didn't get a shared branch from him for that > > to be honest. > > He did provide a shared branch, but I am not sure the right way to use > it. He said it is used for SoC tree to pull it. So I think it is just > used as dependency. Is it OK to just mention it in the PR and add the > pinctrl dts? Or need some other git tags to tell the dependency? It's a bit late now to be adding stuff for 6.12, but for next time what you do is git pull the tag he gave you here https://lore.kernel.org/all/CACRpkdZ5zAgQyo9y_nO8M0Z6b8zqbkg5H_3ceEJN6z6mHL4TOQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ into your for-next branch and then apply the dts patches to your tree after that. And then you make sure to write a commit message for the resulting merge commit that explains why it was pulled.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
