Re: [PATCH v2 16/21] dt-bindings: spi: document support for SA8255p

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 05/09/2024 18:08, Nikunj Kela wrote:
> 
> On 9/5/2024 7:39 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 05/09/2024 16:15, Nikunj Kela wrote:
>>> On 9/5/2024 7:09 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> On 05/09/2024 16:03, Nikunj Kela wrote:
>>>>> On 9/5/2024 1:04 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>>> On 04/09/2024 23:06, Nikunj Kela wrote:
>>>>>>> On 9/4/2024 9:58 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Sorry, didn't realize SPI uses different subject format than other
>>>>>>>>> subsystems. Will fix in v3. Thanks
>>>>>>>> Each subsystem is free to use its own form. e.g for netdev you will
>>>>>>>> want the prefix [PATCH net-next v42] net: stmmac: dwmac-qcom-ethqos:
>>>>>>> of course they are! No one is disputing that.
>>>>>>>> This is another reason why you should be splitting these patches per
>>>>>>>> subsystem, and submitting both the DT bindings and the code changes as
>>>>>>>> a two patch patchset. You can then learn how each subsystem names its
>>>>>>>> patches.
>>>>>>> Qualcomm QUPs chips have serial engines that can be configured as
>>>>>>> UART/I2C/SPI so QUPs changes require to be pushed in one series for all
>>>>>>> 3 subsystems as they all are dependent.
>>>>>> No, they are not dependent. They have never been. Look how all other
>>>>>> upstreaming process worked in the past.
>>>>> Top level QUP node(patch#18) includes i2c,spi,uart nodes.
>>>>> soc/qcom/qcom,geni-se.yaml validate those subnodes against respective
>>>>> yaml. The example that is added in YAML file for QUP node will not find
>>>>> sa8255p compatibles if all 4 yaml(qup, i2c, spi, serial nodes) are not
>>>>> included in the same series.
>>>>>
>>>> So where is the dependency? I don't see it. 
>>> Ok, what is your suggestion on dt-schema check failure in that case as I
>>> mentioned above? Shall we remove examples from yaml that we added?
>> I don't understand what sort of failure you want to fix and why examples
>> have any problem here. 
> 
> If the QUPs yaml changes are not included in the same series with

They cannot be included in the same series. You just think that
including here solves the problem so go ahead, simulate the merging:
1. Bjorn applies soc/qcom/qcom,geni-se.yaml patch and tests. His tree
MUST build, so it also must pass dt_binding_check.
Does it pass? No.

2. SPI maintainer... ah, no point even going there.

> i2c,serial yaml changes, you see these errors:
> 
> /builds/robherring/dt-review-ci/linux/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/qcom,geni-se.example.dtb: geniqup@9c0000: serial@990000:compatible:0: 'qcom,sa8255p-geni-uart' is not one of ['qcom,geni-uart', 'qcom,geni-debug-uart']
> /builds/robherring/dt-review-ci/linux/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/qcom,geni-se.example.dtb: geniqup@9c0000: i2c@984000:compatible:0: 'qcom,sa8255p-geni-i2c' is not one of ['qcom,geni-i2c', 'qcom,geni-i2c-master-hub']

Don't grow examples if not needed. Or create dependencies and ask
maintainers to cross-merge.

Best regards,
Krzysztof





[Index of Archives]     [Kernel]     [Gnu Classpath]     [Gnu Crypto]     [DM Crypt]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]
  Powered by Linux