[PATCH 0/2] STM32: Fixes for 4.19 cycle

[PATCH 0/2] STM32: Fixes for 4.19 cycle

[Alexandre Torgue]

Hi Arnd, olof and Kevin

Those 2 patches fixe the same issue on 4.19-rc: a bad usage of the mdma
binding inside stm32mp157c.dts file. Can you please add them as fixe for 4.19 ?

Thanks in advance
Alex

Alexandre Torgue (1):
  ARM: dts: stm32: update HASH1 dmas property on stm32mp157c

Amelie Delaunay (1):
  ARM: dts: stm32: update SPI6 dmas property on stm32mp157c

 arch/arm/boot/dts/stm32mp157c.dtsi | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

-- 
2.7.4

[PATCH 1/2] ARM: dts: stm32: update SPI6 dmas property on stm32mp157c

[Alexandre Torgue]

From: Amelie Delaunay <amelie.delaunay@st.com>

Remove unused parameter from SPI6 dmas property on stm32mp157c SoC.

Fixes: dc3f8c86c10d ("ARM: dts: stm32: add SPI support on stm32mp157c")
Signed-off-by: Amelie Delaunay <amelie.delaunay@st.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@st.com>

diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/stm32mp157c.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/stm32mp157c.dtsi
index 661be94..185541a 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/stm32mp157c.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/stm32mp157c.dtsi
@@ -1078,8 +1078,8 @@
 			interrupts = <GIC_SPI 86 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
 			clocks = <&rcc SPI6_K>;
 			resets = <&rcc SPI6_R>;
-			dmas = <&mdma1 34 0x0 0x40008 0x0 0x0 0>,
-			       <&mdma1 35 0x0 0x40002 0x0 0x0 0>;
+			dmas = <&mdma1 34 0x0 0x40008 0x0 0x0>,
+			       <&mdma1 35 0x0 0x40002 0x0 0x0>;
 			dma-names = "rx", "tx";
 			status = "disabled";
 		};
-- 
2.7.4

[PATCH 2/2] ARM: dts: stm32: update HASH1 dmas property on stm32mp157c

[Alexandre Torgue]

Remove unused parameter from HASH1 dmas property on stm32mp157c SoC.

Fixes: 1e726a40e067 ("ARM: dts: stm32: Add HASH support on stm32mp157c")

Signed-off-by: Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@st.com>

diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/stm32mp157c.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/stm32mp157c.dtsi
index 185541a..04cf534 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/stm32mp157c.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/stm32mp157c.dtsi
@@ -923,7 +923,7 @@
 			interrupts = <GIC_SPI 80 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
 			clocks = <&rcc HASH1>;
 			resets = <&rcc HASH1_R>;
-			dmas = <&mdma1 31 0x10 0x1000A02 0x0 0x0 0x0>;
+			dmas = <&mdma1 31 0x10 0x1000A02 0x0 0x0>;
 			dma-names = "in";
 			dma-maxburst = <2>;
 			status = "disabled";
-- 
2.7.4

[PATCH 0/2] STM32: Fixes for 4.19 cycle

[Olof Johansson]

Hi Alexandre,

On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 06:34:15PM +0200, Alexandre Torgue wrote:
> Hi Arnd, olof and Kevin
> 
> Those 2 patches fixe the same issue on 4.19-rc: a bad usage of the mdma
> binding inside stm32mp157c.dts file. Can you please add them as fixe for 4.19 ?

The patches only mention removing unused property contents, not what the bug is
that it fixes (or if it's even causing any problems). Care you clarify?

If it's just fixing inaccurate DT that isn't used, then it's not something we
urgently need to fix in 4.19 and it can wait for 4.20.


Thanks,


-Olof

[PATCH 0/2] STM32: Fixes for 4.19 cycle

[Alexandre Torgue]

Hi Olof

On 09/23/2018 02:34 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
> Hi Alexandre,
> 
> On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 06:34:15PM +0200, Alexandre Torgue wrote:
>> Hi Arnd, olof and Kevin
>>
>> Those 2 patches fixe the same issue on 4.19-rc: a bad usage of the mdma
>> binding inside stm32mp157c.dts file. Can you please add them as fixe for 4.19 ?
> 
> The patches only mention removing unused property contents, not what the bug is
> that it fixes (or if it's even causing any problems). Care you clarify?

Sure.
Concerning SPI patch: without this patch, DMA request will fail but 
there will be no crash because SPI will switch in interrupt mode.
Concerning HASH one, it's just to align DT with dt-bindings documentation.
Regarding the minor issue that they fix I could understand that you 
postpone the merge of those two patches for 4.20.

Regards
Alex

> 
> If it's just fixing inaccurate DT that isn't used, then it's not something we
> urgently need to fix in 4.19 and it can wait for 4.20.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> -Olof
> 

[PATCH 0/2] STM32: Fixes for 4.19 cycle

[Olof Johansson]

Hi,


On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 7:55 AM, Alexandre Torgue
<alexandre.torgue@st.com> wrote:
> Hi Olof
>
> On 09/23/2018 02:34 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
>>
>> Hi Alexandre,
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 06:34:15PM +0200, Alexandre Torgue wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Arnd, olof and Kevin
>>>
>>> Those 2 patches fixe the same issue on 4.19-rc: a bad usage of the mdma
>>> binding inside stm32mp157c.dts file. Can you please add them as fixe for
>>> 4.19 ?
>>
>>
>> The patches only mention removing unused property contents, not what the
>> bug is
>> that it fixes (or if it's even causing any problems). Care you clarify?
>
>
> Sure.
> Concerning SPI patch: without this patch, DMA request will fail but there
> will be no crash because SPI will switch in interrupt mode.
> Concerning HASH one, it's just to align DT with dt-bindings documentation.
> Regarding the minor issue that they fix I could understand that you postpone
> the merge of those two patches for 4.20.

The former sounds like an appropriate fix, but the latter is probably
4.20 material, indeed.

Should I just cherry-pick the two patches, or do you want to re-stage
new branches?


-Olof

[PATCH 0/2] STM32: Fixes for 4.19 cycle

[Alexandre Torgue]

Olof

On 09/24/2018 11:19 AM, Olof Johansson wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> 
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 7:55 AM, Alexandre Torgue
> <alexandre.torgue@st.com> wrote:
>> Hi Olof
>>
>> On 09/23/2018 02:34 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Alexandre,
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 06:34:15PM +0200, Alexandre Torgue wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Arnd, olof and Kevin
>>>>
>>>> Those 2 patches fixe the same issue on 4.19-rc: a bad usage of the mdma
>>>> binding inside stm32mp157c.dts file. Can you please add them as fixe for
>>>> 4.19 ?
>>>
>>>
>>> The patches only mention removing unused property contents, not what the
>>> bug is
>>> that it fixes (or if it's even causing any problems). Care you clarify?
>>
>>
>> Sure.
>> Concerning SPI patch: without this patch, DMA request will fail but there
>> will be no crash because SPI will switch in interrupt mode.
>> Concerning HASH one, it's just to align DT with dt-bindings documentation.
>> Regarding the minor issue that they fix I could understand that you postpone
>> the merge of those two patches for 4.20.
> 
> The former sounds like an appropriate fix, but the latter is probably
> 4.20 material, indeed.
> 
> Should I just cherry-pick the two patches, or do you want to re-stage
> new branches?

I have nothing else to send for v4.20 so if you can directly take those 
two patches for v4.20, I agree.

thanks
alex

> 
> 
> -Olof
> 

[PATCH 0/2] STM32: Fixes for 4.19 cycle

[Olof Johansson]

On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 11:28:17AM +0200, Alexandre Torgue wrote:
> Olof
> 
> On 09/24/2018 11:19 AM, Olof Johansson wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > 
> > On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 7:55 AM, Alexandre Torgue
> > <alexandre.torgue@st.com> wrote:
> > > Hi Olof
> > > 
> > > On 09/23/2018 02:34 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Hi Alexandre,
> > > > 
> > > > On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 06:34:15PM +0200, Alexandre Torgue wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > Hi Arnd, olof and Kevin
> > > > > 
> > > > > Those 2 patches fixe the same issue on 4.19-rc: a bad usage of the mdma
> > > > > binding inside stm32mp157c.dts file. Can you please add them as fixe for
> > > > > 4.19 ?
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > The patches only mention removing unused property contents, not what the
> > > > bug is
> > > > that it fixes (or if it's even causing any problems). Care you clarify?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Sure.
> > > Concerning SPI patch: without this patch, DMA request will fail but there
> > > will be no crash because SPI will switch in interrupt mode.
> > > Concerning HASH one, it's just to align DT with dt-bindings documentation.
> > > Regarding the minor issue that they fix I could understand that you postpone
> > > the merge of those two patches for 4.20.
> > 
> > The former sounds like an appropriate fix, but the latter is probably
> > 4.20 material, indeed.
> > 
> > Should I just cherry-pick the two patches, or do you want to re-stage
> > new branches?
> 
> I have nothing else to send for v4.20 so if you can directly take those two
> patches for v4.20, I agree.

Thanks! Applied to fixes and next/dt respectively.


-Olof

[PATCH 0/2] STM32: Fixes for 4.19 cycle

[Olof Johansson]

On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 8:42 PM Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 11:28:17AM +0200, Alexandre Torgue wrote:
> > Olof
> >
> > On 09/24/2018 11:19 AM, Olof Johansson wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 7:55 AM, Alexandre Torgue
> > > <alexandre.torgue@st.com> wrote:
> > > > Hi Olof
> > > >
> > > > On 09/23/2018 02:34 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Alexandre,
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 06:34:15PM +0200, Alexandre Torgue wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Arnd, olof and Kevin
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Those 2 patches fixe the same issue on 4.19-rc: a bad usage of the mdma
> > > > > > binding inside stm32mp157c.dts file. Can you please add them as fixe for
> > > > > > 4.19 ?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The patches only mention removing unused property contents, not what the
> > > > > bug is
> > > > > that it fixes (or if it's even causing any problems). Care you clarify?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sure.
> > > > Concerning SPI patch: without this patch, DMA request will fail but there
> > > > will be no crash because SPI will switch in interrupt mode.
> > > > Concerning HASH one, it's just to align DT with dt-bindings documentation.
> > > > Regarding the minor issue that they fix I could understand that you postpone
> > > > the merge of those two patches for 4.20.
> > >
> > > The former sounds like an appropriate fix, but the latter is probably
> > > 4.20 material, indeed.
> > >
> > > Should I just cherry-pick the two patches, or do you want to re-stage
> > > new branches?
> >
> > I have nothing else to send for v4.20 so if you can directly take those two
> > patches for v4.20, I agree.
>
> Thanks! Applied to fixes and next/dt respectively.

Looks like "ARM: dts: stm32: update HASH1 dmas property on
stm32mp157c" got dropped due to being applied to the wrong
tree/branch, so included it in fixes now.


-Olof