On 23/01/2024 09:57, Tudor Ambarus wrote: > > > On 1/23/24 08:44, Tudor Ambarus wrote: >>> However I don't fully understand why that dependency - except patch hunk >>> context - exists. You shouldn't have such dependency. >>> >> Let me try offline, I'll get back to you. > > The dropped patches depend on the dt-bindings patch that you queued > through the "next/drivers" branch: > > b393a6c5e656 dt-bindings: clock: google,gs101-clock: add PERIC0 clock > management unit > > We need the peric0 bindings that are referenced in device tree, that's > why the next/dt64 branch failed to build. > > Please let me know if there's something on my side that I have to do > (now or in the future). It is useful to mention this in cover letter, so I will know how to apply the patches. I understand therefore the dependency mention in the cover letter is not accurate, so I can ignore that aspect. Best regards, Krzysztof
