On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 7:55 AM Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 07:44:33AM +0100, Sergio Paracuellos wrote: > > Hi Greg, > > > > On Sat, Feb 5, 2022 at 8:31 AM Sergio Paracuellos > > <sergio.paracuellos@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, Feb 5, 2022 at 3:55 AM Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > Quoting Sergio Paracuellos (2022-01-26 04:45:31) > > > > > On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 1:14 PM Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 01:08:52PM +0100, Sergio Paracuellos wrote: > > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 1:06 PM Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 12:49:26PM +0100, Sergio Paracuellos wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This patch series add minimal change to provide mt7621 resets properly > > > > > > > > > defining them in the 'mediatek,mt7621-sysc' node which is the system > > > > > > > > > controller of the SoC and is already providing clocks to the rest of > > > > > > > > > the world. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is shared architecture code for all ralink platforms in 'reset.c' > > > > > > > > > file located in 'arch/mips/ralink' but the correct thing to do to align > > > > > > > > > hardware with software seems to define and add related reset code to the > > > > > > > > > already mainlined clock driver. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > After this changes, we can get rid of the useless reset controller node > > > > > > > > > in the device tree and use system controller node instead where the property > > > > > > > > > '#reset-cells' has been added. Binding documentation for this nodeq has > > > > > > > > > been updated with the new property accordly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This series also provide a bindings include header where all related > > > > > > > > > reset bits for the MT7621 SoC are defined. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, please take a look to this review [0] to understand better motivation > > > > > > > > > for this series. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding the way of merging this: > > > > > > > > > - I'd like patches 1 and 4 which are related going through staging tree. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Patches 1 and 4 now in the staging tree, thanks. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Stephen wanted all to go through the CLK tree since PATCH 3 and 1 were > > > > > > > also a dependency... Can we get all of them through the same tree, > > > > > > > then? I am ok with both CLK or staging trees. > > > > > > > > > > > > That's fine with me if they all go through the CLK tree, but there will > > > > > > be a merge issue that I already fixed up in my tree. If you want me to > > > > > > drop them, just let me know. > > > > > > > > > > Stephen, what do you prefer? Is it better all going through staging-tree then? > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sure take them through staging tree. > > > > > > > > Acked-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Thanks, Stephen. > > > > > > Greg, can you please take remaining patches 2 and 3 through your tree, then? > > > > > > Thanks in advance for your time. > > > > Please, let me know if you prefer me to resend the remaining two > > patches with tags added to make this easier for you. > > Please do so, as I can't seem to dig up the remaining ones... Ok, done. Please check: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-staging/20220210094859.927868-1-sergio.paracuellos@xxxxxxxxx/T/#t Best regards, Sergio Paracuellos > > thanks, > > greg k-h
