On 18/04/2022 10:19, Michael Walle wrote:
> [resend, use Krysztof's new email address]
>
> Am 2022-04-18 01:41, schrieb Linus Walleij:
>> On Sat, Mar 19, 2022 at 9:47 PM Michael Walle <michael@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> Convert the ocelot-pinctrl device tree binding to the new YAML format.
>>>
>>> Additionally to the original binding documentation, add interrupt
>>> properties which are optional and already used on several SoCs like
>>> SparX-5, Luton, Ocelot and LAN966x but were not documented before.
>>>
>>> Also, on the sparx5 and the lan966x SoCs there are two items for the
>>> reg property.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Michael Walle <michael@xxxxxxxx>
>>
>> So is this single patch something I should apply to the pin control
>> tree?
>
> The first five patches will fix the validation errrors once the
> binding is converted to the YAML format. So, do they need to go
> through the same tree?
>
> Also as mentioned, there is this pending series [1] which is the
> reason I've converted the binding to YAML in the first place. So
> at least the first patch of this series will have to go through
> the same tree as the YAML conversion patch.
>
> How can we move forward here? Krzysztof, maybe all of the dt
> bindings patches can go through your tree and I'll reposting
> the second patch of [1] afterwards?
I think you got all necessary acks for this pinctrl bindings change and
the dependency ("add reset property"), so both can go via Linus' tree.
That's preferred.
DTS patches goes through your SoC maintainer tree.
At least this is the usual scenario, but maybe I missed here something.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
