Hi, Amelie DELAUNAY <amelie.delaunay@xxxxxx> writes: > Hi Felipe, Alex, > > On 10/11/2017 04:38 PM, Alexandre Torgue wrote: >> >> >> On 10/11/2017 03:26 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@xxxxxx> writes: >>>> Hi >>>> >>>> On 10/11/2017 01:50 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@xxxxxx> writes: >>>>>> Hi Felip >>>>>> >>>>>> On 10/11/2017 12:04 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Amelie Delaunay <amelie.delaunay@xxxxxx> writes: >>>>>>>> The STM32F7 MCU family embeds two DWC2 USB OTG cores. One core is >>>>>>>> USB >>>>>>>> OTG FS and the other is USB OTG HS. The USB FS core only works >>>>>>>> with its >>>>>>>> internal phy whilst the USB HS core can work in HS with external >>>>>>>> ULPI phy >>>>>>>> or in FS/LS with the on-chip FS phy. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Amelie Delaunay (7): >>>>>>>> dt-bindings: usb: Document the STM32F7 DWC2 USB OTG HS core >>>>>>>> binding >>>>>>>> usb: dwc2: add support for STM32F7 USB OTG HS >>>>>>>> ARM: dts: stm32: Add USB HS support for STM32F746 MCU >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have applied these three patches. Should I take the rest? They >>>>>>> seems >>>>>>> like they could go upstream through the ARM maintainers. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I will take other DT patches in my PR. >>>>>> >>>>>> Concerning "ARM: dts: stm32: Add USB HS support for STM32F746 MCU" >>>>>> patch >>>>>> I prefer also to take it. This patch adds some pinctrl groups but >>>>>> stm32 >>>>>> pinctrl bindings will change in my next PR (we will use a macro to >>>>>> define pins instead of using defined values). So if you push the DT >>>>>> patch through your pull request there will be a merge issue. >>>>>> It is possible that I take also this one ? >>>>> >>>>> In that case, it's best if you take them all :-) Here's my Ack: >>>>> >>>>> Acked-by: Felipe Balbi <felipe.balbi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> >>>>> I'll drop them from my tree now >>>> >>>> Ok perfect, I will take DT patches (3 to 7) and I let you take patch 1&2 >>>> in your tree. >>> >>> Well, I have dropped them from my tree. Please two 1-7 through yours. >> >> Hum, ok for this patchset but IMO it is better (next time) that you take >> driver pacthes in your tree and I take only DT patches in mine. >> No ? >> >> Regards >> Alex >> >>> > > I thought that patches 1 and 2, as they are "driver" patches, had to be > applied on USB tree (so Felipe's one), and the others (3 to 7) had to be > applied on STM32-DT tree (Alex's one). Did I miss something? patch 1 is documentation, right? Without the documentation patch, checkpatch will cringe :-) So either way works. If you insist, I can take 1-2 through my tree. No worries. let me know -- balbi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
