From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from gloria.sntech.de (gloria.sntech.de [185.11.138.130]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E7DCE184D for ; Thu, 24 Feb 2022 10:06:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [185.156.123.69] (helo=phil.localnet) by gloria.sntech.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nNB17-0008WC-GT; Thu, 24 Feb 2022 11:06:33 +0100 From: Heiko Stuebner To: Lee Jones Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski , Rob Herring , Benson Leung , Guenter Roeck , Thierry Reding , Uwe =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Kleine=2DK=F6nig?= , Matthias Brugger , Andy Gross , Bjorn Andersson , Douglas Anderson , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, chrome-platform@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] dt-bindings: pwm: google,cros-ec: include generic pwm schema Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2022 11:06:30 +0100 Message-ID: <1817486.VeUe9BSz9F@phil> In-Reply-To: References: <20220214081916.162014-1-krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com> <3248917.W5uN0jUHDo@phil> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: chrome-platform@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Am Donnerstag, 24. Februar 2022, 11:02:48 CET schrieb Lee Jones: > On Wed, 23 Feb 2022, Heiko Stuebner wrote: > > > Hi Lee, > > > > Am Mittwoch, 23. Februar 2022, 10:16:01 CET schrieb Lee Jones: > > > On Mon, 14 Feb 2022, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > > > > > Include generic pwm.yaml schema, which enforces PWM node naming. Keep > > > > the old name in bindings as deprecated. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski > > > > --- > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/google,cros-ec.yaml | 4 ++++ > > > > > > Acked-by: Lee Jones > > > > what is your expectation regarding this patch? > > > > Are you planning to merge it or are you expecting this to go through > > some other tree? > > > > The binding-change here is backward-comaptible in that the old > > node-name is still in it, only marked as deprecated, so in theory > > this patch should be able to be applied on its own without > > causing defects. > > In an ideal world, it would be broken up and I would take the MFD > part. Is that possible or are there dependencies? That is also what Krzysztof had in mind - see his reply to patch4. Binding going through the MFD tree and soc maintainers applying the individual dts patches. As written the binding change is backward compatible, so no harm. I was just confused by the "Acked-by" and wanted to clarify how you see it ;-) Heiko