10.12.2021 17:27, Thierry Reding пишет: > On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 09:38:06PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >> 09.12.2021 20:33, Thierry Reding пишет: >>> From: Thierry Reding <treding@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> OPP nodes do not have a "reg" property and therefore shouldn't have a >>> unit-address. Instead, use a dash instead of the '@' and ',' characters >>> to allow validation of the nodes against the DT schema. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <treding@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> .../boot/dts/tegra124-peripherals-opp.dtsi | 142 ++++++++--------- >>> .../boot/dts/tegra20-cpu-opp-microvolt.dtsi | 82 +++++----- >>> arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra20-cpu-opp.dtsi | 82 +++++----- >>> .../arm/boot/dts/tegra20-peripherals-opp.dtsi | 36 ++--- >>> .../boot/dts/tegra30-cpu-opp-microvolt.dtsi | 144 +++++++++--------- >>> arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra30-cpu-opp.dtsi | 144 +++++++++--------- >>> .../arm/boot/dts/tegra30-peripherals-opp.dtsi | 130 ++++++++-------- >>> 7 files changed, 382 insertions(+), 378 deletions(-) >> >> This patch is wrong, you haven't renamed the delete-node properties [1]. > > Yeah, I noticed that too as I was reworking the EMC timing nodes as you > requested. Please use my version of the patch that was well tested. >> Please stop rewriting patches and use what already has been sent out and >> tested, thanks. >> >> [1] >> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linux-tegra/patch/20211130232347.950-35-digetx@xxxxxxxxx/ > > I've had versions of this in my tree for literally years now, so I > haven't exactly been rewriting these. Rather this is an iteration of > work that I had started over 18 months ago: > > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linux-tegra/patch/20200616135238.3001888-26-thierry.reding@xxxxxxxxx/ I was commenting on that old patchset and was aware about that old patch, it's unrelated here. > After that obviously things had to be changed again. The earliest > version that you sent that I can find is from late October which is when > I was already in the midst of this latest effort to get Tegra DTBs to > validate. What you're saying here, is that you don't look at the patches on the ML. This is exactly what happened more than one time in the past when patches missed merge window and a large part of work was held back by another two months. This happened not only to me, but also to other people, it's bad to see when you're about to do it again. > What's really been happening here is that we haven't been communicating > and ended up duplicating work. > > Stop making this into something it isn't. It's impossible to communicate when you're not looking at the messages or not replying. I don't know where the problem is. If you're too busy and don't have enough time for maintaining upstream, then solution could be to share the duties with more people.
