Hi, Doug On 2017?01?10? 11:06, Doug Anderson wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 5:27 PM, Xing Zheng <zhengxing at rock-chips.com> wrote: >> The structure rockchip_clk_provider needs to refer the GRF regmap >> in somewhere, if the CRU node has not "rockchip,grf" property, >> calling syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle will return an invalid GRF >> regmap, and the MUXGRF type clock will be not supported. >> >> Therefore, we need to add them. >> >> Signed-off-by: Xing Zheng <zhengxing at rock-chips.com> >> --- >> >> Changes in v3: >> - add optional roperty rockchip,grf in rockchip,rk3399-cru.txt >> >> Changes in v2: >> - referring pmugrf for PMUGRU >> - fix the typo "invaild" in COMMIT message >> >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/rockchip,rk3399-cru.txt | 5 +++++ >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399.dtsi | 2 ++ > "dts" and bindings shouldn't change in the same patch since they go > through different trees. This is why I said: > >> This looks sane to me, but before you land it you need to first send >> up a (separate) patch that adjusts: >> -------- > AKA: you need a two patch series here. > > Sometimes it's OK to include bindings together with code changes > (depends on the maintainer), but never with dts changes. > > -Doug For little lazy, I did refer other SoC platform to using "dts" and bindings in the same patch... OK, I will use a two patch series. Thanks > > -- - Xing Zheng
