Re: [PATCH v1] Documentation/process: add soc maintainer handbook

From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
Cc: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>, <soc@kernel.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>, <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	<linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] Documentation/process: add soc maintainer handbook
Date: Tue, 16 May 2023 10:15:40 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230516-tactical-handcraft-d245a095faa4@wendy> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cca446b3-9b92-3191-ae0d-1bd7e552c90f@linaro.org>

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1837 bytes --]

On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 11:06:41AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 16/05/2023 10:57, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 10:31:19AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >> On 15/05/2023 21:20, Conor Dooley wrote:

> >>> + - Defer the devicetree changes to a release after the binding and driver have
> >>> +   already been merged
> >>> +
> >>> + - Change the bindings in a shared immutable branch that is used as the base for
> >>> +   both the driver change and the devicetree changes
> >>
> >> The policy told to me some time ago was that no merges from driver
> >> branch or tree are allowed towards DTS branch, even if they come only
> >> with binding header change. There are exceptions for this, e.g. [1], but
> >> that would mean we need to express here rules for cross-tree merges.
> > 
> > I've got away with having an immutable branch for dt-binding headers!
> 
> Of course, all is in an immutable branch, but in which tree?

For example:
- dt-bindings & header with the clock defines in the base/immutable branch
  on top of -rc1
- driver patches on top of the immutable branch, in a PR to Stephen
- dts patches on top of the immutable branch, PR to Arnd

So, clock tree doesn't get the dts, soc tree doesn't get the driver.
Hopefully that clarifies what I meant.

> I talk about a case when driver tree, e.g. different clock maintainer,
> takes the binding.

If the other tree just "takes the binding", without some coordination,
then you're SOOL and have to wait a release.

> > That said, Arnd did actually have a look at this (and suggested some
> > changes) before I sent it & did not cry fowl about this section. IIRC,
> > this is actually his wording, not mine.

Probably worth Arnd chiming in & just telling us what he is okay with
taking.

Cheers,
Conor.

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 161 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv