Re: [PATCH v9 -next 08/12] arm64: dts: bcm2712: Add external clock for RP1 chipset on Rpi5

Florian Fainelli
2025-05-27T21:26:54Z

On 5/27/25 14:24, Andrea della Porta wrote:
> Hi Florian,
>
> On 09:18 Tue 27 May , Florian Fainelli wrote:
>> On 5/26/25 07:06, Matthias Brugger wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 12/05/2025 18:42, Andrea della Porta wrote:
>>>> Hi Florian,
>>>>
>>>> On 15:02 Mon 12 May     , Florian Fainelli wrote:
>>>>> On May 7, 2025 5:01:05 PM GMT+02:00, Andrea della Porta
>>>>> <andrea.porta@suse.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Florian, to accept the patches, what would work best for you?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1) Send only the relevant updated patches (maybe as an entirely new
>>>>>> patchset with
>>>>>>    only those specific patches)
>>>>>
>>>>> Only the updated patches work for me. I don't think there is
>>>>> that much coupling between the DT changes and the non-DT changes
>>>>> (other than without DT entries nothing is activated)
>>>>
>>>> It's a little bit more involved than that:
>>>>
>>>> - Patch 7 (misc driver) depends on 6 (RP1 common dts) which in turn
>>>>    depends on 1 (clock binding header). Should be taken by Greg.
>>>
>>> Greg gave an Acked-by so I think Florian is good to take that patch.
>>> Which leaves us to the clock patches (driver + dt-bindings).
>>>
>>>>
>>>> - Patch 9 and 10 (board dts) depends on 6 (RP1 common dts) which again
>>>>    depends on 1 (clock binding header). Should be taken by Florian.
>>>>
>>>> - Patch 4 (clock driver) depends on 1 (clock binding header) and
>>>>    should be taken by Stephen.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Steven reviewed the patches (driver + dt-binding) so he is waiting for a
>>> new version which addresses the review. He offered to either take them
>>> and provide a branch that Florian can merge into his branch or provide a
>>> Acked-by tag.
>>>
>>> @Florian what would you prefer?
>>
>> I am fine either way, it's definitively simpler if I can take all of the
>> patches in the respective Broadcom ARM SoC branches, but pulling a branch
>> from another maintainer's tree works just as well.
>>
>> Andrea, sorry to ask you this, can you post a v10 and we aim to get that
>> version applied?
>
> No problem, just to avoid any confusion I'll summarize what-goes-where with
> respect to branches in your repo broadcom/stblinux, so I can adapt each patch
> to the relevant branch:
>
> - dt-binding/DTS (patch 1,2,3,6,8,9,10) -> devicetree/next

Ack

> - defconfig (patch 11,12) -> defconfig/next

Ack

> - drivers (patch 4,5,7) -> drivers/next or soc/next?

I will take them in drivers/next.

>
> Also, should I split any patches that have MAINTAINERS changes so you can apply
> them to your maintainers/next branch? Those are patches 4,5,6,7.

Not sure there is much value in splitting the MAINTAINERS file apart,
maybe one initial commit covering all of the entries you are right about
to add would do, up to you.
--
Florian