Re: [PATCH v2] dt-bindings: mfd: syscon: Add ti,j784s4-acspcie-proxy-ctrl compatible

[Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>]

On Mon, 29 Jul 2024, Siddharth Vadapalli wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 10:04:53AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 12:10:12PM +0530, Siddharth Vadapalli wrote:
> > > The ACSPCIE_PROXY_CTRL registers within the CTRL_MMR space of TI's J784S4
> > > SoC are used to drive the reference clock to the PCIe Endpoint device via
> > > the PAD IO Buffers. Add the compatible for allowing the PCIe driver to
> > > obtain the regmap for the ACSPCIE_CTRL register within the System
> > > Controller device-tree node in order to enable the PAD IO Buffers.
> > > 
> > > The Technical Reference Manual for J784S4 SoC with details of the
> > > ASCPCIE_CTRL registers is available at:
> > > https://www.ti.com/lit/zip/spruj52
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Siddharth Vadapalli <s-vadapalli@ti.com>
> > > Acked-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
> > > ---
> > > 
> > > Hello,
> > > 
> > > This patch is based on linux-next tagged next-20240729.
> > > v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240715120936.1150314-2-s-vadapalli@ti.com/
> > > Changes since v1:
> > > - Rebased patch on next-20240729.
> > > - Separated this patch from the series.
> > > - Collected Acked-by tag from:
> > >   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
> > >   https://lore.kernel.org/r/04d94188-5e30-4cab-b534-e97c0b2a61f3@kernel.org/
> > > 
> > > NOTE: Though it was mentioned on 25th July 2024 that this patch was applied:
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/r/172190301400.925833.12525656543896105526.b4-ty@kernel.org/
> > > since I did not find the commit in the MFD tree and the Linux-Next tree,
> > > I am reposting this patch.
> > 
> > That's because it was in the middle of the merge window and only fixes 
> > get published during that time. That's now over, so it should get 
> > published soon. However, maintainers get busy on other work or take 
> > vacation, so it could be delayed.
> > 
> > Unless a maintainer updates their tree with other later patches and your 
> > patch is not there, no reason to worry and resend.

Thanks Rob.

> I was under the assumption that a commit ID is mentioned after the patch
> gets applied to the Maintainer's tree and is visible publicly. Thank you
> for clarifying the details regarding the process followed. I will make
> sure to wait long enough before resending any patches in the future.

Pushed now.

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]