Re: (subset) [PATCH 00/17] dt-bindings: samsung: add specific compatibles for existing SoC

[Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>]

On 28/11/2023 21:58, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 06:49:23PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 08 Nov 2023 11:43:26 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> Merging
>>> =======
>>> I propose to take entire patchset through my tree (Samsung SoC), because:
>     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
>>> 1. Next cycle two new SoCs will be coming (Google GS101 and ExynosAutov920), so
>>>    they will touch the same lines in some of the DT bindings (not all, though).
>>>    It is reasonable for me to take the bindings for the new SoCs, to have clean
>>>    `make dtbs_check` on the new DTS.
>>> 2. Having it together helps me to have clean `make dtbs_check` within my tree
>>>    on the existing DTS.
>>> 3. No drivers are affected by this change.
>>> 4. I plan to do the same for Tesla FSD and Exynos ARM32 SoCs, thus expect
>>>    follow up patchsets.
>>>
>>> [...]
>>
>> Applied, thanks!
>>
>> [12/17] dt-bindings: pwm: samsung: add specific compatibles for existing SoC
>>         commit: 5d67b8f81b9d598599366214e3b2eb5f84003c9f
> 
> You didn't honor (or even comment) Krzysztof's proposal to take the
> whole patchset via his tree (marked above). Was there some off-list
> agreement?
> 

It was also written in the PWM patch itself (under changelog ---) and
expressed with my "applied" response when I took everything. I am
sending now another set, also touching PWM.

Best regards,
Krzysztof