On Mon, Feb 05, 2024 at 10:25:46AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 02/02/2024 23:28, Frank Li wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 11:05:11AM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > >> On Thu, 01 Feb 2024 15:22:40 -0500 Frank Li wrote: > >>> dt-bindings: mmc: fsl-imx-esdhc: add iommus property > >>> dt-bindings: net: fec: add iommus property > >>> arm64: dts: imx8qm: add smmu node > >>> arm64: dts: imx8qm: add smmu stream id information > >>> > >>> .../devicetree/bindings/mmc/fsl-imx-esdhc.yaml | 3 ++ > >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/fsl,fec.yaml | 3 ++ > >>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8qm-ss-conn.dtsi | 6 ++++ > >>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8qm.dtsi | 41 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> > >> Any preference on whether all these go via a platform tree, > >> or should we pick up the net patch to netdev? I guess taking > >> the DTB via netdev would be the usual way to handle this? > > > > Supposed dt-bindings go through netdev tree. > > > > without dt-bindings, just DTB_CHECK warning. No strict dependence > > relationship between dt-bindings doc and dts file. > > Please make it easier for maintainers and sent entirely independent > patches for different subsystems in SEPARATE patchsets. > > There is no dependency here between anything. Combining it, OTOH, brings > the questions about such dependency and makes it a bit more difficult to > apply for each maintainer. Understand, but without dts change, it is not easy to understand why need change dt-binding files. Frank > > Best regards, > Krzysztof >
