On 24/07/2023 08:05, Alexander Stein wrote: > Hi, > > Am Freitag, 21. Juli 2023, 14:22:06 CEST schrieb Krzysztof Kozlowski: >> On 21/07/2023 10:19, Alexander Stein wrote: >>> Use id-gpios and vbus-gpios instead. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Alexander Stein <alexander.stein@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Acked-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@xxxxxxxxx> #rockchip >>> Reviewed-by: Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@xxxxxxxxx> #mediatek >>> Reviewed-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno >>> <angelogioacchino.delregno@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Acked-by: Shawn Guo >>> <shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Acked-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> Changes in v3: >>> * Rebased to next-20230721 >>> * Split from bindings patch >> >> I think you wanted to split it per subsystem, right? That's why you >> resent/v3? But the split did not happen. > > Yes, I split it into dt bindings and DT changes patches. Is this not correct? We talked about DTS patch - this one. It was already split between bindings and DTS, so this would not have been a topic at all. > >> If you decide not to split, >> then try to figure out: who should pick up this patchset? > > Well, intention was one patch for DT bindings maintainers and these two > patches for imx maintainer (Shawn AFAIK). You touch there much more than IMX, so if you intend that you need to be pretty clear. I see there around 5% of changes from IMX, so targeting IMX is a weird choice. > I've send patches separated by arch/ > arm and arch/arm64 in one series, so I'm slightly confused now. So telling you second time - don't. Split per subsystem. Best regards, Krzysztof
