From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Andrew Jeffery" Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] ARM: dts: aspeed: Deprecate g[45]-style compatibles Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2019 15:15:42 +0930 Message-ID: <3691f6cb-2451-43f7-9f00-d5693071ba59@www.fastmail.com> References: <20190724081313.12934-1-andrew@aj.id.au> <9d0f2b20-e6f6-419c-a866-c4a0dd92aa63@www.fastmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: In-Reply-To: <9d0f2b20-e6f6-419c-a866-c4a0dd92aa63@www.fastmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Linus Walleij Cc: linux-aspeed , Lee Jones , Rob Herring , Mark Rutland , Joel Stanley , "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" , Linux ARM , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 30 Jul 2019, at 10:27, Andrew Jeffery wrote: > > > On Tue, 30 Jul 2019, at 07:23, Linus Walleij wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 10:13 AM Andrew Jeffery wrote: > > > > > It's probably best if we push the three patches all through one tree rather > > > than fragmenting. Is everyone happy if Joel applies them to the aspeed tree? > > > > If you are sure it will not collide with parallell work in the > > pinctrl tree, yes. > > Acked-by: Linus Walleij > > > > (If it does collide I'd prefer to take the pinctrl patches and fix the > > conflicts in my tree.) > > Fair enough, I don't know the answer so I'll poke around. I don't > really mind > where the series goes in, I just want to avoid landing only part of it > if I split it up. Okay, it currently conflicts with my cleanup-devicetree-warnings series. Joel, do you mind if Linus takes this series through the pinctrl tree, given the fix to the devicetrees is patch 1/3? Andrew