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

[Andrea della Porta <andrea.porta@suse.com>]

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
- defconfig (patch 11,12) -> defconfig/next
- drivers (patch 4,5,7) -> drivers/next or soc/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.

Many thanks,
Andrea

> Thanks!
> -- 
> Florian