On 12/03/2025 12:39, Peter Griffin wrote: > Hi Krzysztof, > > On Wed, 12 Mar 2025 at 11:31, Peter Griffin <peter.griffin@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Hi Krzysztof, >> >> Thanks for the review feedback. >> >> On Tue, 11 Mar 2025 at 19:36, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> On 07/03/2025 11:29, Peter Griffin wrote: >>>> gs101 differs to other SoCs in that fltcon1 register doesn't >>>> always exist. Additionally the offset of fltcon0 is not fixed >>>> and needs to use the newly added eint_fltcon_offset variable. >>>> >>>> Fixes: 4a8be01a1a7a ("pinctrl: samsung: Add gs101 SoC pinctrl configuration") >>>> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>> >>> It looks this depends on previous commit, right? >> >> Yes that's right, it depends on the refactoring in the previous patch. >> To fix the bug (which is an Serror on suspend for gs101), we need the >> dedicated gs101 callback so it can have the knowledge that fltcon1 >> doesn't always exist and it's varying offset. > > and also dependent on the first patch that adds the eint_fltcon_offset :) That would be fine because it's a fix as well. Ah, well, let's keep the dependency, but then I think syntax would be: Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # depends on the previous three patches Best regards, Krzysztof