linux-next: duplicate patches in the regulator tree

linux-next: duplicate patches in the regulator tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 442 bytes --]

Hi all,

The following commits are also in the mfd tree as different commits
(but the same patches):

  d7a5f27342a8 ("mfd: sec-core: add s2dos05 support")
  ef9690c04f3b ("dt-bindings: mfd: add samsung,s2dos05")

These are commits

  59d9022639ed ("mfd: sec-core: Add support for the Samsung s2dos05")
  1d6e7612a129 ("dt-bindings: mfd: Add support for the samsung,s2dos05")

in the mfd tree.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: duplicate patches in the regulator tree

[Lee Jones]

On Wed, 16 Oct 2024, Stephen Rothwell wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> The following commits are also in the mfd tree as different commits
> (but the same patches):
> 
>   d7a5f27342a8 ("mfd: sec-core: add s2dos05 support")
>   ef9690c04f3b ("dt-bindings: mfd: add samsung,s2dos05")

And these ones do not follow the style expected by the subsystem.

Mark can you please remove these without reverting and further dirtying
MFD's history please?  One little rebase isn't going to hurt in the long
run. :)

> These are commits
> 
>   59d9022639ed ("mfd: sec-core: Add support for the Samsung s2dos05")
>   1d6e7612a129 ("dt-bindings: mfd: Add support for the samsung,s2dos05")
> 
> in the mfd tree.
> 
> -- 
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell



-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]

Re: linux-next: duplicate patches in the regulator tree

[Mark Brown]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 871 bytes --]

On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 08:55:10AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Oct 2024, Stephen Rothwell wrote:

> > The following commits are also in the mfd tree as different commits
> > (but the same patches):

> >   d7a5f27342a8 ("mfd: sec-core: add s2dos05 support")
> >   ef9690c04f3b ("dt-bindings: mfd: add samsung,s2dos05")

> And these ones do not follow the style expected by the subsystem.

> Mark can you please remove these without reverting and further dirtying
> MFD's history please?  One little rebase isn't going to hurt in the long
> run. :)

There's additional stuff on top of them now and I'm not clear that the
regulator patch would build without the MFD.  I don't understand why you
said to apply the patches after I'd reviewed the regulator patch,
usually you insist on waiting until all other subsystems have reviewed
before applying the MFD cores :(

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: duplicate patches in the regulator tree

[Lee Jones]

On Wed, 16 Oct 2024, Mark Brown wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 08:55:10AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Wed, 16 Oct 2024, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> 
> > > The following commits are also in the mfd tree as different commits
> > > (but the same patches):
> 
> > >   d7a5f27342a8 ("mfd: sec-core: add s2dos05 support")
> > >   ef9690c04f3b ("dt-bindings: mfd: add samsung,s2dos05")
> 
> > And these ones do not follow the style expected by the subsystem.
> 
> > Mark can you please remove these without reverting and further dirtying
> > MFD's history please?  One little rebase isn't going to hurt in the long
> > run. :)
> 
> There's additional stuff on top of them now and I'm not clear that the
> regulator patch would build without the MFD.  I don't understand why you
> said to apply the patches after I'd reviewed the regulator patch,
> usually you insist on waiting until all other subsystems have reviewed
> before applying the MFD cores :(

I said to apply the regulator patch because it looked like it didn't
have any dependencies.  The latter part was my mistake as now I see that
it did have deps.

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]

Re: linux-next: duplicate patches in the regulator tree

[Mark Brown]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 259 bytes --]

On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 02:09:24PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:

> I said to apply the regulator patch because it looked like it didn't
> have any dependencies.  The latter part was my mistake as now I see that
> it did have deps.

I've now dropped those patches.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: linux-next: duplicate patches in the regulator tree

[Lee Jones]

On Tue, 22 Oct 2024, Mark Brown wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 16, 2024 at 02:09:24PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> 
> > I said to apply the regulator patch because it looked like it didn't
> > have any dependencies.  The latter part was my mistake as now I see that
> > it did have deps.
> 
> I've now dropped those patches.

Thanks Mark, I appreciate that.

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]