Hi!
On 2024. 11. 04. 13:48, Alexander Dahl wrote:
Hi,
Am Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 01:37:52PM +0100 schrieb Csókás Bence:
Hi,
On 2024. 10. 30. 12:09, Tudor Ambarus wrote:
I think it's fine to split sama7g5 addition in smaller steps. But please
add the sama7g5 support in the same patch set, otherwise this patch
doesn't make sense on its own.
Well, actually, we're using SAMA5D2. My goal was just to somewhat harmonize
upstream with the vendor kernel so that we may contribute other patches that
we have made on top of the latter, or in the future, take patches from
upstream and apply it to our vendor kernel-based tree. This patch was only
meant to lay the groundworks for future SAMA7G5 support. I can of course
send the "other half" of the original patch if needed, but I wouldn't want
it to hold up this refactor.
It would actually be better if vendor would bring their stuff
upstream, so there's no need for a vendor kernel. Did you talk to
Microchip about their upstreaming efforts? What was the answer?
Greets
Alex
Agreed. Though in this case, the original patch *was* submitted by
Microchip (by Tudor, originally) for upstream inclusion, but it was not
merged. Hence this forward-port.
Link:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-spi/20211214133404.121739-1-tudor.ambarus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/
Bence
