On 14/07/2022 23:11, Conor Dooley - M52691 wrote: > On 14/07/2022 23:04, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: >> I'm trying to sort out how to merge this one. I'm not opposed to taking it through the RISC-V tree as Rob's reviewed/acked the bindings, but just figured I'd say something before putting anything on for-next to try and minimize confusion. >> >> Unless I'm missing something it's just patch 3 that's been taken so far, via Vinod's tree. I've dropped that one and put the rest on palmer/riscv-canaan_dt_schema, if that looks good then I'll take it into riscv/for-next when this loops back to the top of my queue. >> >> Thanks! > > Patches 1 & 2 never got review from the DRM side and patch 12 > depends on those. If it comes to it, you could drop those three > (and patch 3 that Vinod took). The only other one is patch 4, > which has Krzysztof's ack as memory-controller maintainer, so > that one should be okay. Hey Palmer, These fixes have been sitting on palmer/riscv-canaan_dt_schema for a few weeks now, without an autobuilder complaint etc. Could you move it onto for-next? Would be nice to clear these up for 6.0 :) Thanks, Conor.
