Message ID | 20240326-ep93xx-v9-0-156e2ae5dfc8@maquefel.me |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | ep93xx device tree conversion | expand |
Hello Arnd, On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 11:07:06AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Tue, Mar 26, 2024, at 10:18, Nikita Shubin via B4 Relay wrote: > > The goal is to recieve ACKs for all patches in series to merge it via > > Arnd branch. > > Thank you for the continued updates, I really hope we can merge > it all for 6.10. I've looked through it again and I'm pretty much > ready to just merge it, though I admit that the process is not > working out that great, and it would probably have been quicker > to add DT support to drivers individually through the subsystem > trees. > > > Stephen Boyd, Vinod Koul PLEASE! give some comments on following, couse > > i hadn't one for a couple of iterations already: > > > > Following patches require attention from Stephen Boyd, as they were > > converted to aux_dev as suggested: > > > > - ARM: ep93xx: add regmap aux_dev > > - clk: ep93xx: add DT support for Cirrus EP93xx > > > > Following patches require attention from Vinod Koul: > > > > - dma: cirrus: Convert to DT for Cirrus EP93xx > > - dma: cirrus: remove platform code > > I suspect that Stephen and Vinod may be missing this, as reviewing > a 38 patch series tends to be a lot of work, and they may have > missed that they are on the critical path here. I certainly > tend to just ignore an entire thread when it looks like I'm not > immediately going to be reviewing it all and other people are > likely to have more comments first, so I'm not blaming them. > > To better catch their attention, I would suggest you repost the > two smaller sets of patches as a separate series, with only the > relevant people on Cc. Please also include the respective > bindings when you send send these patches to Stephen and > Vinod. It seems this happend for the clock series; it's at https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240408-ep93xx-clk-v1-0-1d0f4c324647@maquefel.me/ and received an ack by Stephen. Vinod gave some feedback in this thread with some remarks that need addressing. With the latter I wonder if the plan to get this as a whole into v6.10 is screwed and if I should pick up the PWM bits (patches #12, #13 and maybe #38) via my tree. Patch #38 touches arch/arm and include/linux/soc, so I wouldn't pick that one up without an explicit ack by (I guess) Arnd. Best regards Uwe