Re: [PATCH v2] ARC: reset: introduce AXS10x reset driver
Hi Vineet, On Mon, 2017-09-18 at 18:51 +0200, Philipp Zabel wrote: > > Will it be OK for you to apply the corresponding DT update for > > platform - that way > > I don't have to keep track of when ur branch hits mainline etc. > > > > The chances of any ensuing conflicts are pretty rare - and easy to resolve > > if at all. > > > > If so, Eugeniy can send the patch ur way ! > > Maybe it is better to do this the other way around? I can put this patch > on a stable reset/arc branch for you to merge before applying the reset > DT updates. Have you come to a decision on this? Just in case, I have removed the AXS10x driver from the reset/next branch and put it on its own branch: git://git.pengutronix.de/git/pza/linux.git reset/arc This branch is immutable and I'll merge it into reset/next before submitting the branch for v4.15-rc1. regards Philipp ___ linux-snps-arc mailing list linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-snps-arc
Re: [PATCH v2] ARC: reset: introduce AXS10x reset driver
Hi Philipp, On 10/04/2017 03:09 AM, Philipp Zabel wrote: Maybe it is better to do this the other way around? I can put this patch on a stable reset/arc branch for you to merge before applying the reset DT updates. Have you come to a decision on this? Just in case, I have removed the AXS10x driver from the reset/next branch and put it on its own branch: git://git.pengutronix.de/git/pza/linux.git reset/arc This branch is immutable and I'll merge it into reset/next before submitting the branch for v4.15-rc1. Thanks for creating this ! Here's the plan. I have some changes queued up for 4.14-rc4 (which includes a adding a reset workaround since the driver is not in for 4.14). Once that is merged in mainline this week, I will create my for-next based on 4.14-rc4 + git pull --no-ff ur-branch + reverts for reset hack above. OK ? -Vineet ___ linux-snps-arc mailing list linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-snps-arc
Re: [GIT PULL] Reset controller fixes for v4.14
Hi Olof, On 10/03/2017 06:10 PM, Olof Johansson wrote: On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 06:12:59PM +0200, Philipp Zabel wrote: Dear arm-soc-maintainers, please consider merging this tag for v4.14. It removes the "v1" suffix from the newly merged HSDK reset driver, fixes its Kconfig dependencies, and adds back the DT binding documentation that I accidentally dropped onto the floor when applying the original patch. regards Philipp The following changes since commit 2bd6bf03f4c1c59381d62c61d03f6cc3fe71f66e: Linux 4.14-rc1 (2017-09-16 15:47:51 -0700) are available in the git repository at: git://git.pengutronix.de/git/pza/linux.git tags/reset-fixes-for-4.14 for you to fetch changes up to 544e3bf4f0e8278400f19ca7918a3cdf2548b4eb: reset: Restrict RESET_HSDK to ARC_SOC_HSDK or COMPILE_TEST (2017-09-21 12:44:01 +0200) Reset controller fixes for v4.14 - Remove misleading HSDK v1 suffix, as there is no v2 planned - Add missing DT binding documentation for HSDK reset driver - Fix HSDK reset driver dependencies Merged, thanks. What's the tentative plan for this hitting mainline since I have pending ARC HSDK DT changes to use the new DT binding. If it is not goign to be 4.14-rc4, is it OK for me to pull this branch into ARC tree as well and send to Linus' way before armsoc pull request. Does it matter if Linux gets same changes via 2 tree ! P.S. Consider this no-ob question since I don't use merge commits in my typical workflow ! -Vineet ___ linux-snps-arc mailing list linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-snps-arc
Re: [GIT PULL] Reset controller fixes for v4.14
Hi, On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 11:46 AM, Vineet Gupta wrote: > Hi Olof, > > On 10/03/2017 06:10 PM, Olof Johansson wrote: >> >> On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 06:12:59PM +0200, Philipp Zabel wrote: >>> >>> Dear arm-soc-maintainers, >>> >>> please consider merging this tag for v4.14. It removes the "v1" suffix >>> from the newly merged HSDK reset driver, fixes its Kconfig dependencies, >>> and adds back the DT binding documentation that I accidentally dropped >>> onto the floor when applying the original patch. >>> >>> regards >>> Philipp >>> >>> The following changes since commit >>> 2bd6bf03f4c1c59381d62c61d03f6cc3fe71f66e: >>> >>>Linux 4.14-rc1 (2017-09-16 15:47:51 -0700) >>> >>> are available in the git repository at: >>> >>>git://git.pengutronix.de/git/pza/linux.git tags/reset-fixes-for-4.14 >>> >>> for you to fetch changes up to 544e3bf4f0e8278400f19ca7918a3cdf2548b4eb: >>> >>>reset: Restrict RESET_HSDK to ARC_SOC_HSDK or COMPILE_TEST (2017-09-21 >>> 12:44:01 +0200) >>> >>> >>> Reset controller fixes for v4.14 >>> >>> - Remove misleading HSDK v1 suffix, as there is no v2 planned >>> - Add missing DT binding documentation for HSDK reset driver >>> - Fix HSDK reset driver dependencies >> >> >> Merged, thanks. > > > What's the tentative plan for this hitting mainline since I have pending ARC > HSDK DT changes to use the new DT binding. If it is not goign to be > 4.14-rc4, is it OK for me to pull this branch into ARC tree as well and send > to Linus' way before armsoc pull request. Does it matter if Linux gets same > changes via 2 tree ! > > P.S. Consider this no-ob question since I don't use merge commits in my > typical workflow ! Linus just merged it so it will be part of -rc4. In general, a one-off patch being duplicate is not a big deal, but one dealing with renames like this can cause conflicts when merged as two patches so it's better to use a shared base. In the future, if you anticipate this being needed, you can always request the maintainer to apply the fix to a stable branch that you can use as a base for your work. That way the specific commit will only be in the tree once, even if it comes in via two paths. -Olof ___ linux-snps-arc mailing list linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-snps-arc
