[GIT PULL] Immutable tag between SpacemiT's reset and clock trees for v6.17

[GIT PULL] Immutable tag between SpacemiT's reset and clock trees for v6.17

[Yixun Lan]

Hi Philipp,

Please pull the following change into the reset tree. This
allows you to apply the patch 5 of the SpacemiT reset driver [1].

Thanks,
Yixun Lan

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250702113709.291748-6-elder@riscstar.com [1]

The following changes since commit 19272b37aa4f83ca52bdf9c16d5d81bdd1354494:

  Linux 6.16-rc1 (2025-06-08 13:44:43 -0700)

are available in the Git repository at:

  https://github.com/spacemit-com/linux tags/spacemit-reset-binding-for-6.17-1

for you to fetch changes up to 25a59e813cd2ca728047f657d64f9b29480be393:

  dt-bindings: soc: spacemit: define spacemit,k1-ccu resets (2025-07-03 22:16:08 +0800)

----------------------------------------------------------------
RISC-V SpacemiT Binding for 6.17

- Reset DT Binding for K1 SoC

----------------------------------------------------------------
Alex Elder (1):
      dt-bindings: soc: spacemit: define spacemit,k1-ccu resets

 .../bindings/soc/spacemit/spacemit,k1-syscon.yaml  |  27 +++-
 include/dt-bindings/clock/spacemit,k1-syscon.h     | 141 +++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 162 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)


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

Re: [GIT PULL] Immutable tag between SpacemiT's reset and clock trees for v6.17

[Philipp Zabel]

On Do, 2025-07-03 at 15:18 +0000, Yixun Lan wrote:
> Hi Philipp,
> 
> Please pull the following change into the reset tree. This
> allows you to apply the patch 5 of the SpacemiT reset driver [1].
> 
> Thanks,
> Yixun Lan
> 
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250702113709.291748-6-elder@riscstar.com [1]

Sorry I didn't notice before, this is missing k1-syscon.h from Patch 2.
 
Can we get a clock maintainer ack to place patch 2 in the shared tag as
well? Otherwise you could split patch 2 into soc and clk parts.

regards
Philipp

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

Re: [GIT PULL] Immutable tag between SpacemiT's reset and clock trees for v6.17

[Yixun Lan]

Hi Philipp,

On 12:02 Fri 04 Jul     , Philipp Zabel wrote:
> On Do, 2025-07-03 at 15:18 +0000, Yixun Lan wrote:
> > Hi Philipp,
> > 
> > Please pull the following change into the reset tree. This
> > allows you to apply the patch 5 of the SpacemiT reset driver [1].
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Yixun Lan
> > 
> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250702113709.291748-6-elder@riscstar.com [1]
> 
> Sorry I didn't notice before, this is missing k1-syscon.h from Patch 2.
>  
no problem

> Can we get a clock maintainer ack to place patch 2 in the shared tag as
> well? Otherwise you could split patch 2 into soc and clk parts.
for the ack, I'd assume Stephen have no objection (Cc him explicitly)

technically, there is no problem to place more patches in the shared
tag, since the tag will be both sent(by me) to clock and reset tree,
so no conflicts in the end.

if you expect to at least pass compiling test with patch 5 in reset
branch only, then patch 1, 2, 3 should be included, otherwise need to
pull clk branch for additional dependency patches.

I would propose to have shared tag to include patch 1-4, then you can
pick patch 5, in this way, it should both pass all tests (both
compile-time and run-time)

what do you think?

-- 
Yixun Lan (dlan)

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

Re: [GIT PULL] Immutable tag between SpacemiT's reset and clock trees for v6.17

[Philipp Zabel]

On So, 2025-07-06 at 04:06 +0000, Yixun Lan wrote:
> Hi Philipp,
> 
> On 12:02 Fri 04 Jul     , Philipp Zabel wrote:
> > On Do, 2025-07-03 at 15:18 +0000, Yixun Lan wrote:
> > > Hi Philipp,
> > > 
> > > Please pull the following change into the reset tree. This
> > > allows you to apply the patch 5 of the SpacemiT reset driver [1].
> > > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > Yixun Lan
> > > 
> > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250702113709.291748-6-elder@riscstar.com [1]
> > 
> > Sorry I didn't notice before, this is missing k1-syscon.h from Patch 2.
> >  
> no problem
> 
> > Can we get a clock maintainer ack to place patch 2 in the shared tag as
> > well? Otherwise you could split patch 2 into soc and clk parts.
> for the ack, I'd assume Stephen have no objection (Cc him explicitly)
> 
> technically, there is no problem to place more patches in the shared
> tag, since the tag will be both sent(by me) to clock and reset tree,
> so no conflicts in the end.
> 
> if you expect to at least pass compiling test with patch 5 in reset
> branch only, then patch 1, 2, 3 should be included, otherwise need to
> pull clk branch for additional dependency patches.

3 as well? Oh, that's for struct spacemit_ccu_adev. IMHO this patch
series is not well structured for applying across trees. This should
have been a single patch that adds include/soc/spacemit/k1-syscon.h, to
be shared by both clk and reset trees, and no other dependencies
between clk and reset patches for this to work well.

> I would propose to have shared tag to include patch 1-4, then you can
> pick patch 5, in this way, it should both pass all tests (both
> compile-time and run-time)would would 

Since this is a new driver, passing run-time tests is not a concern.
Compile-time is, since that would break bisectability for everyone.

> what do you think?

I feel like it's easier and safer for the whole series to be merged via
the clk tree. Since this adds a new reset driver, the only possible
merge conflicts are trivial ones in drivers/reset/{Kconfig,Makefile}.

regards
Philipp

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

Re: [GIT PULL] Immutable tag between SpacemiT's reset and clock trees for v6.17

[Yixun Lan]

Hi Philipp,

On 11:46 Mon 07 Jul     , Philipp Zabel wrote:
> On So, 2025-07-06 at 04:06 +0000, Yixun Lan wrote:
> > Hi Philipp,
> > 
> > On 12:02 Fri 04 Jul     , Philipp Zabel wrote:
> > > On Do, 2025-07-03 at 15:18 +0000, Yixun Lan wrote:
> > > > Hi Philipp,
> > > > 
> > > > Please pull the following change into the reset tree. This
> > > > allows you to apply the patch 5 of the SpacemiT reset driver [1].
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Yixun Lan
> > > > 
> > > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250702113709.291748-6-elder@riscstar.com [1]
> > > 
> > > Sorry I didn't notice before, this is missing k1-syscon.h from Patch 2.
> > >  
> > no problem
> > 
> > > Can we get a clock maintainer ack to place patch 2 in the shared tag as
> > > well? Otherwise you could split patch 2 into soc and clk parts.
> > for the ack, I'd assume Stephen have no objection (Cc him explicitly)
> > 
> > technically, there is no problem to place more patches in the shared
> > tag, since the tag will be both sent(by me) to clock and reset tree,
> > so no conflicts in the end.
> > 
> > if you expect to at least pass compiling test with patch 5 in reset
> > branch only, then patch 1, 2, 3 should be included, otherwise need to
> > pull clk branch for additional dependency patches.
> 
> 3 as well? Oh, that's for struct spacemit_ccu_adev. IMHO this patch
> series is not well structured for applying across trees. This should
> have been a single patch that adds include/soc/spacemit/k1-syscon.h, to
> be shared by both clk and reset trees, and no other dependencies
> between clk and reset patches for this to work well.

I feel this is much difficult, e.g. the patch 2 touches both drivers/clk
and include/soc/spacemit/k1-syscon.h - moving definitions, and splitting
into two patches sounds weird

> 
> > I would propose to have shared tag to include patch 1-4, then you can
> > pick patch 5, in this way, it should both pass all tests (both
> > compile-time and run-time)would would 
> 
> Since this is a new driver, passing run-time tests is not a concern.
> Compile-time is, since that would break bisectability for everyone.
> 
make sense

> > what do you think?
> 
> I feel like it's easier and safer for the whole series to be merged via
> the clk tree. Since this adds a new reset driver, the only possible
> merge conflicts are trivial ones in drivers/reset/{Kconfig,Makefile}.
> 
ok, I agree, then let's route the whole series via clk tree, and I assume 
Stephen is fine with this, since it's indeed much simple.

thanks

-- 
Yixun Lan (dlan)

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