From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.zeus03.de (zeus03.de [194.117.254.33]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 50CAE3FC5B4 for ; Wed, 20 May 2026 17:11:41 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=194.117.254.33 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1779297105; cv=none; b=aSxaRg1dWShRSOdMtckWBCFxdX7lkuSP6X7I5vvNZxu6GWGjRFEae/Q7PRwzj8IIxe9RJAIMsL68hIQ4sKIUMEa2h5ULeYPMxJELwR057JUO6uWHGXoiwu40TZK4txXPjKdIPV9N2Qq3Mpj613sVS/HG05LPlxeo4e/V/EG8Kpg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1779297105; c=relaxed/simple; bh=k2Q85aaymmwbOsFUcDfL90XgQNjxC7S86f5E332dBT0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=G2NeGjx2PkvPb5/9KYq1qzaX6N2ZNMpI523u1C8c+KHK8eaAKuRebtxWBIiC/Uhy1zIeccvLQMGUMbtWMAOEckwOhv0Hnk+FBzF42yKnQPuhbcWEmjA/3lAqCOCiSigkI2ffYIZqDcreO9eeNrzM/ruEQtO3OxIr18OxQvJhDsU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=sang-engineering.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sang-engineering.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sang-engineering.com header.i=@sang-engineering.com header.b=Y296BHC3; arc=none smtp.client-ip=194.117.254.33 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=sang-engineering.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sang-engineering.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sang-engineering.com header.i=@sang-engineering.com header.b="Y296BHC3" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= sang-engineering.com; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=k1; bh=k2Q8 5aaymmwbOsFUcDfL90XgQNjxC7S86f5E332dBT0=; b=Y296BHC3Gsjhe5skVNgE H6oDtoQ1RYqb18IlBp1n8AMwTTnD+GRtdGsOsxe6+aajqa+ExVbfiV1lo302IFKi 7bIuLzsRRGwy9k8/Hr/oKF/eW8lAMzfluJDri9bDEIsbSKYMZC3NKydy8/hzcJ9/ nlZaBKRox7EZrotRdW1dv9HXIAsTXLJVvKugqAw3F0ZU9yW/k94ExoHKfeFCQ2OS PBXD6uN2wGXy7WfOFoxcPODyhMolR/3bdo20ojPcwKrouhJXuu2I+AXmGAwDda9f Qh4u4iYclP8FIRX7DlpjFI0BKqOH9HtmU+vS9ovGA/v0ClNuFzfS8PVXHxWRcxVw fg== Received: (qmail 744310 invoked from network); 20 May 2026 19:11:39 +0200 Received: by mail.zeus03.de with ESMTPSA (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted, authenticated); 20 May 2026 19:11:39 +0200 X-UD-Smtp-Session: l3s3148p1@b8KO40JS3TttKXAe Date: Wed, 20 May 2026 19:11:38 +0200 From: Wolfram Sang To: Mark Brown Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski , Thomas Lin , rafael@kernel.org, lenb@kernel.org, hoan@os.amperecomputing.com, linusw@kernel.org, mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com, andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com, jsd@semihalf.com, andi.shyti@kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-spi@vger.kernel.org, lucas_hao@lecomputing.com, puntar_liu@lecomputing.com, jihua_tao@lecomputing.com, stan_xu@lecomputing.com, lumin_liu@lecomputing.com, notics_zhang@lecomputing.com, braden_zhang@lecomputing.com, harold_wu@lecomputing.com, will_zhang@lecomputing.com, aurora_jiang@lecomputing.com, ryen_lin@lecomputing.com, andy_jiang@lecomputing.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] gpio: dwapb: Add ACPI ID LECA0001 for LECARC SoCs Message-ID: References: <20260520081140.637637-1-thomas_lin@lecomputing.com> <20260520081140.637637-2-thomas_lin@lecomputing.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="C43eFg3inUFmpyWE" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: --C43eFg3inUFmpyWE Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, May 20, 2026 at 04:24:12PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, May 20, 2026 at 05:15:12PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: >=20 > > I'm not sure about how to interpret the cover letter - is it fine to > > take this independently through the GPIO tree for v7.2? >=20 > AFAICT any dependency that exists is runtime only, it's just a bunch of > quirks and none of the patches touch header files. Patch 3 depends on patch 2. So, maybe it can go all in via GPIO? --C43eFg3inUFmpyWE Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEOZGx6rniZ1Gk92RdFA3kzBSgKbYFAmoN60YACgkQFA3kzBSg KbZuWg/7B0Oyzh9DcRFzHGW1LOVv+kxrLl+xW5SlGK4be3TLyZh64SFUzEsyJbCj fXK4DX/kR1DKWKdwpmF7DoI/8n3EpVzF/kH52/HU3P0zpcH5PwnudVyHL/Pscg9d D9iKbEamsC5F+dPI4/V6xWDqWfjXNgKe5aO/w/SnLHbIo7ClF5BKyAzYulUWqOcE 9BuSj14mk7uAwok6Y9k9gsr/yNpBU9R3mpp9VvS7JKATH7FWnxv8Q16jWnXNVl77 V6M+priqzlBg0CeTEdtnpVY+6XwDt66axEtG/TgjAk8FIxSDebTAdTgKuL9Eo+uW H/r6+G13vZdP7jQHj8obnlOOLJMLQOsIHUKIfJFiaXMXylStCqSCerVBbh3GATHw 4rxOnYOc4AXeARWNroecJXTZgwUfhlP01LliWAYeEDGAaj6O4lAbOCvFTBXROxWY cDI8O9+je/Pz4RjnIWN6K8Y0YVB8vrEE5dXrvW4z08k+MffDeIB8Kw+rUKx62FSx RP0pYTkD6zxZ0QamBA0woPfsWu3FCenPCOU/+h/tLXBBHJDWSoTtTgiDNcqvXn5c fONzPtn0rHr+Q1yv8dgozrF0xXMvx+ausJSCWcTV6KaCVs1Z+CckjTdg4pyHcs0A X1zzOEefVJIc8+LVcLAa/LB5uY9UTGsQyI9CFWvGWHsemIDVdjw= =mm9A -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --C43eFg3inUFmpyWE--