On 12/6/21 11:13 AM, Florian Fainelli wrote:
On 12/6/21 11:10 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On 12/6/21 10:55 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
On Mon, 06 Dec 2021, Florian Fainelli wrote:
On 12/6/21 1:05 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
On Mon, 06 Dec 2021, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
On 06.12.2021 09:44, Lee Jones wrote:
On Mon, 06 Dec 2021, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
On 15.11.2021 06:53, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
From: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@xxxxxxxxxx>
This helps validating DTS files.
Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@xxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@xxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>
I'm not familiar with handling multi-subsystem patchsets (here:
watchdog
& MFD).
Please kindly let me know: how to proceed with this patchset now
to get
it queued for Linus?
What is the requirement for these to be merged together?
If you merge 2/2 without 1/2 then people running "make
dt_binding_check"
may see 1 extra warning until both patches meet in Linus's tree.
So it all comes to how much you care about amount of warnings produced
by "dt_binding_check".
In -next, I don't, but I know Rob gets excited about it.
Rob, what is your final word on this? Is it a forced requirement for
all interconnected document changes to go in together?
The first patch is queued up in Guenter's watchdog tree here:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/groeck/linux-staging.git/commit/?h=watchdog-next&id=a5b2ebc8f6e67b5c81023e8bde6b19ff48ffdb02
and will be submitted to Wim shortly I believe, so I suppose we should
take patch #2 via Guenter and Wim's tree as well logically.
If that happens, I would like a PR to an immutable branch.
I don't entirely see the point of that complexity for dt changes,
but whatever. Since my tree is not the official watchdog-next tree,
that means I can not take the entire series (which goes way beyond
the dt changes and also drops the bcm63xx driver). Unless I hear
otherwise, I'll drop the series from my tree for the time being
and wait for the dt changes to be sorted out.
There is simply no rush in getting the bcm7038-wdt driver to support
4908 *just now*, so why don't you just take the bcm63xx-wdt series that
I posed, and Rafal posts an updated series that adds support for the
4908 watchdog for the 5.18 cycle?
Your series includes the patch discussed here, and it is the first patch
of your series. The second patch in your series depends on it. Are you
telling me that I should drop those two patches from your series ?
For reference, the patches are
079a2959e68b dt-bindings: watchdog: Add BCM6345 compatible to BCM7038 binding
a5b2ebc8f6e6 dt-bindings: watchdog: convert Broadcom's WDT to the json-schema
in my watchdog-next branch.
Guenter
