Hi, On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 10:55 AM Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 09:54:54AM -0800, Doug Anderson wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Tue, Feb 8, 2022 at 11:21 AM Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 08, 2022 at 11:57:20AM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 12:43:45PM -0800, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote: > > > > > Add nodes for the onboard USB hub on trogdor devices. Remove the > > > > > 'always-on' property from the hub regulator, since the regulator > > > > > is now managed by the onboard_usb_hub driver. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > No DT maintainer approval yet? :( > > > > > > Bjorn usually just picks DT changes into the QCOM tree when they are > > > ready, so I wouldn't interpret anything into the lack of an explicit > > > Ack. > > > > Right, so the expectation is that this patch wouldn't land through the > > USB tree but would instead land through the Qualcomm tree, probably a > > revision after the code lands in the USB tree to avoid dependency > > problems. > > But our tools pick up the whole series. I can't just do "i will pick > patches 1-4 only" easily, and neither can any other maintainer. > > Why not just get their ack so that I know it can come through the USB > tree? That's what normally happens for other changes like this where a > driver change is required first. Huh. That's the first time I've heard that and I'm pretty used to patches in a series going through different trees, but it would be OK w/ me if Bjorn was willing to Ack this. Bjorn: what say you? I guess alternatively Matthias could send two series: one with the code and a later one with the dts. -Doug
