Re: [PATCH 0/9] Renesas RSPI/QSPI DT support

[Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>]

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 09:40:34AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 1:53 AM, Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 01:55:19PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >> On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 12:13 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven
> >> <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> >
> >         [1/9] spi: rspi: Add missing clk_disable() calls in error and cleanup paths
> >         [2/9] spi: rspi: Convert to clk_prepare_enable/disable_unprepare
> >         [3/9] spi: rspi: Use NULL as the clock ID
> >         [4/9][V3] spi: rspi: Add DT support
> >
> >> >     [5/9] ARM: shmobile: r7s72100: Add RSPI clocks for DT
> >> >     [6/9][V3] ARM: shmobile: r7s72100 dtsi: Add RSPI nodes
> >> >     [7/9][V3] ARM: shmobile: genmai reference: Add RSPI nodes
> >> >     [8/9] ARM: shmobile: r8a7791 dtsi: Add QSPI node
> >> >     [9/9] ARM: shmobile: koelsch: Add QSPI nodes
> >>
> >> Forgot to mention:
> >>
> >> The ARM/shmobile part is based on renesas-devel-v3.13-rc7-20140109v2, with
> >> Magnus' pinctrl, Wolfram's riic, Simon's sh_eth, Valentine's i2c pinctrl
> >> and Laurent's SCIF DT work applied on top.
> >> [Simon: I don't know in which order you will merge these. If you want me
> >>  to rebase my patches, just ask! Thanks!]
> >
> > Firstly, I would like an Ack from Magnus on the shmobile patches.
> >
> > With regards to merge order, my preference is to merge patches
> > in parallel once their dependencies will no longer change.
> >
> > So for this series it lools like.
> >
> > 5/9: Can be merged independently of other patches in the series.
> >      But there isn't much point in merging it until the rest of the
> >      series is acked and tested.
> 
> OK.
> 
> > 6-9/9: Needs to wait until 4/9 has at least been acked by Mark
> 
> OK. Based on Mark's comments, there will be a V4.
> 
> >        Also, is 1/9 a run-time dependency of these changes?
> 
> 1/9 is a bugfix. I'll send a rebased version to Mark, as he wanted to
> get that one in first.
> 
> 2-3/9 are run-time dependencies, but 2/9 won't apply without 1/9.

run-time dependencies of 6-9/9 ?