[PATCH v2 1/1] memory: bt1-l2-ctl: Remove not-going-to-be-supported code for Baikal SoC

[PATCH v2 1/1] memory: bt1-l2-ctl: Remove not-going-to-be-supported code for Baikal SoC

[Andy Shevchenko]

As noticed in the discussion [1] the Baikal SoC and platforms
are not going to be finalized, hence remove stale code.

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/22b92ddf-6321-41b5-8073-f9c7064d3432@infradead.org/ [1]
Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
---

v2: dropped DT bindings change (Krzysztof)

 drivers/memory/Kconfig      |  11 --
 drivers/memory/Makefile     |   1 -
 drivers/memory/bt1-l2-ctl.c | 323 ------------------------------------
 3 files changed, 335 deletions(-)
 delete mode 100644 drivers/memory/bt1-l2-ctl.c

diff --git a/drivers/memory/Kconfig b/drivers/memory/Kconfig
index 79df0d22e218..e5527020ff33 100644
--- a/drivers/memory/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/memory/Kconfig
@@ -64,17 +64,6 @@ config BRCMSTB_MEMC
 	  controller and specifically control the Self Refresh Power Down
 	  (SRPD) inactivity timeout.
 
-config BT1_L2_CTL
-	bool "Baikal-T1 CM2 L2-RAM Cache Control Block"
-	depends on MIPS_BAIKAL_T1 || COMPILE_TEST
-	select MFD_SYSCON
-	help
-	  Baikal-T1 CPU is based on the MIPS P5600 Warrior IP-core. The CPU
-	  resides Coherency Manager v2 with embedded 1MB L2-cache. It's
-	  possible to tune the L2 cache performance up by setting the data,
-	  tags and way-select latencies of RAM access. This driver provides a
-	  dt properties-based and sysfs interface for it.
-
 config TI_AEMIF
 	tristate "Texas Instruments AEMIF driver"
 	depends on ARCH_DAVINCI || ARCH_KEYSTONE || COMPILE_TEST
diff --git a/drivers/memory/Makefile b/drivers/memory/Makefile
index c1959661bf63..3ee883c8759a 100644
--- a/drivers/memory/Makefile
+++ b/drivers/memory/Makefile
@@ -11,7 +11,6 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_ARM_PL172_MPMC)	+= pl172.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_ATMEL_EBI)		+= atmel-ebi.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_BRCMSTB_DPFE)	+= brcmstb_dpfe.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_BRCMSTB_MEMC)	+= brcmstb_memc.o
-obj-$(CONFIG_BT1_L2_CTL)	+= bt1-l2-ctl.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_TI_AEMIF)		+= ti-aemif.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_TI_EMIF)		+= emif.o
 obj-$(CONFIG_OMAP_GPMC)		+= omap-gpmc.o
diff --git a/drivers/memory/bt1-l2-ctl.c b/drivers/memory/bt1-l2-ctl.c
deleted file mode 100644
index 0fd96abc172a..000000000000
--- a/drivers/memory/bt1-l2-ctl.c
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,323 +0,0 @@
-// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
-/*
- * Copyright (C) 2020 BAIKAL ELECTRONICS, JSC
- *
- * Authors:
- *   Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru>
- *
- * Baikal-T1 CM2 L2-cache Control Block driver.
- */
-
-#include <linux/kernel.h>
-#include <linux/module.h>
-#include <linux/bitfield.h>
-#include <linux/types.h>
-#include <linux/device.h>
-#include <linux/platform_device.h>
-#include <linux/regmap.h>
-#include <linux/mfd/syscon.h>
-#include <linux/sysfs.h>
-#include <linux/of.h>
-
-#define L2_CTL_REG			0x028
-#define L2_CTL_DATA_STALL_FLD		0
-#define L2_CTL_DATA_STALL_MASK		GENMASK(1, L2_CTL_DATA_STALL_FLD)
-#define L2_CTL_TAG_STALL_FLD		2
-#define L2_CTL_TAG_STALL_MASK		GENMASK(3, L2_CTL_TAG_STALL_FLD)
-#define L2_CTL_WS_STALL_FLD		4
-#define L2_CTL_WS_STALL_MASK		GENMASK(5, L2_CTL_WS_STALL_FLD)
-#define L2_CTL_SET_CLKRATIO		BIT(13)
-#define L2_CTL_CLKRATIO_LOCK		BIT(31)
-
-#define L2_CTL_STALL_MIN		0
-#define L2_CTL_STALL_MAX		3
-#define L2_CTL_STALL_SET_DELAY_US	1
-#define L2_CTL_STALL_SET_TOUT_US	1000
-
-/*
- * struct l2_ctl - Baikal-T1 L2 Control block private data.
- * @dev: Pointer to the device structure.
- * @sys_regs: Baikal-T1 System Controller registers map.
- */
-struct l2_ctl {
-	struct device *dev;
-
-	struct regmap *sys_regs;
-};
-
-/*
- * enum l2_ctl_stall - Baikal-T1 L2-cache-RAM stall identifier.
- * @L2_WSSTALL: Way-select latency.
- * @L2_TAGSTALL: Tag latency.
- * @L2_DATASTALL: Data latency.
- */
-enum l2_ctl_stall {
-	L2_WS_STALL,
-	L2_TAG_STALL,
-	L2_DATA_STALL
-};
-
-/*
- * struct l2_ctl_device_attribute - Baikal-T1 L2-cache device attribute.
- * @dev_attr: Actual sysfs device attribute.
- * @id: L2-cache stall field identifier.
- */
-struct l2_ctl_device_attribute {
-	struct device_attribute dev_attr;
-	enum l2_ctl_stall id;
-};
-
-#define to_l2_ctl_dev_attr(_dev_attr) \
-	container_of(_dev_attr, struct l2_ctl_device_attribute, dev_attr)
-
-#define L2_CTL_ATTR_RW(_name, _prefix, _id) \
-	struct l2_ctl_device_attribute l2_ctl_attr_##_name = \
-		{ __ATTR(_name, 0644, _prefix##_show, _prefix##_store),	_id }
-
-static int l2_ctl_get_latency(struct l2_ctl *l2, enum l2_ctl_stall id, u32 *val)
-{
-	u32 data = 0;
-	int ret;
-
-	ret = regmap_read(l2->sys_regs, L2_CTL_REG, &data);
-	if (ret)
-		return ret;
-
-	switch (id) {
-	case L2_WS_STALL:
-		*val = FIELD_GET(L2_CTL_WS_STALL_MASK, data);
-		break;
-	case L2_TAG_STALL:
-		*val = FIELD_GET(L2_CTL_TAG_STALL_MASK, data);
-		break;
-	case L2_DATA_STALL:
-		*val = FIELD_GET(L2_CTL_DATA_STALL_MASK, data);
-		break;
-	default:
-		return -EINVAL;
-	}
-
-	return 0;
-}
-
-static int l2_ctl_set_latency(struct l2_ctl *l2, enum l2_ctl_stall id, u32 val)
-{
-	u32 mask = 0, data = 0;
-	int ret;
-
-	val = clamp_val(val, L2_CTL_STALL_MIN, L2_CTL_STALL_MAX);
-
-	switch (id) {
-	case L2_WS_STALL:
-		data = FIELD_PREP(L2_CTL_WS_STALL_MASK, val);
-		mask = L2_CTL_WS_STALL_MASK;
-		break;
-	case L2_TAG_STALL:
-		data = FIELD_PREP(L2_CTL_TAG_STALL_MASK, val);
-		mask = L2_CTL_TAG_STALL_MASK;
-		break;
-	case L2_DATA_STALL:
-		data = FIELD_PREP(L2_CTL_DATA_STALL_MASK, val);
-		mask = L2_CTL_DATA_STALL_MASK;
-		break;
-	default:
-		return -EINVAL;
-	}
-
-	data |= L2_CTL_SET_CLKRATIO;
-	mask |= L2_CTL_SET_CLKRATIO;
-
-	ret = regmap_update_bits(l2->sys_regs, L2_CTL_REG, mask, data);
-	if (ret)
-		return ret;
-
-	return regmap_read_poll_timeout(l2->sys_regs, L2_CTL_REG, data,
-					data & L2_CTL_CLKRATIO_LOCK,
-					L2_CTL_STALL_SET_DELAY_US,
-					L2_CTL_STALL_SET_TOUT_US);
-}
-
-static void l2_ctl_clear_data(void *data)
-{
-	struct l2_ctl *l2 = data;
-	struct platform_device *pdev = to_platform_device(l2->dev);
-
-	platform_set_drvdata(pdev, NULL);
-}
-
-static struct l2_ctl *l2_ctl_create_data(struct platform_device *pdev)
-{
-	struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
-	struct l2_ctl *l2;
-	int ret;
-
-	l2 = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*l2), GFP_KERNEL);
-	if (!l2)
-		return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
-
-	ret = devm_add_action(dev, l2_ctl_clear_data, l2);
-	if (ret) {
-		dev_err(dev, "Can't add L2 CTL data clear action\n");
-		return ERR_PTR(ret);
-	}
-
-	l2->dev = dev;
-	platform_set_drvdata(pdev, l2);
-
-	return l2;
-}
-
-static int l2_ctl_find_sys_regs(struct l2_ctl *l2)
-{
-	l2->sys_regs = syscon_node_to_regmap(l2->dev->of_node->parent);
-	if (IS_ERR(l2->sys_regs)) {
-		dev_err(l2->dev, "Couldn't get L2 CTL register map\n");
-		return PTR_ERR(l2->sys_regs);
-	}
-
-	return 0;
-}
-
-static int l2_ctl_of_parse_property(struct l2_ctl *l2, enum l2_ctl_stall id,
-				    const char *propname)
-{
-	int ret = 0;
-	u32 data;
-
-	if (!of_property_read_u32(l2->dev->of_node, propname, &data)) {
-		ret = l2_ctl_set_latency(l2, id, data);
-		if (ret)
-			dev_err(l2->dev, "Invalid value of '%s'\n", propname);
-	}
-
-	return ret;
-}
-
-static int l2_ctl_of_parse(struct l2_ctl *l2)
-{
-	int ret;
-
-	ret = l2_ctl_of_parse_property(l2, L2_WS_STALL, "baikal,l2-ws-latency");
-	if (ret)
-		return ret;
-
-	ret = l2_ctl_of_parse_property(l2, L2_TAG_STALL, "baikal,l2-tag-latency");
-	if (ret)
-		return ret;
-
-	return l2_ctl_of_parse_property(l2, L2_DATA_STALL,
-					"baikal,l2-data-latency");
-}
-
-static ssize_t l2_ctl_latency_show(struct device *dev,
-				   struct device_attribute *attr,
-				   char *buf)
-{
-	struct l2_ctl_device_attribute *devattr = to_l2_ctl_dev_attr(attr);
-	struct l2_ctl *l2 = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
-	u32 data;
-	int ret;
-
-	ret = l2_ctl_get_latency(l2, devattr->id, &data);
-	if (ret)
-		return ret;
-
-	return sysfs_emit(buf, "%u\n", data);
-}
-
-static ssize_t l2_ctl_latency_store(struct device *dev,
-				    struct device_attribute *attr,
-				    const char *buf, size_t count)
-{
-	struct l2_ctl_device_attribute *devattr = to_l2_ctl_dev_attr(attr);
-	struct l2_ctl *l2 = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
-	u32 data;
-	int ret;
-
-	if (kstrtouint(buf, 0, &data) < 0)
-		return -EINVAL;
-
-	ret = l2_ctl_set_latency(l2, devattr->id, data);
-	if (ret)
-		return ret;
-
-	return count;
-}
-
-static L2_CTL_ATTR_RW(l2_ws_latency, l2_ctl_latency, L2_WS_STALL);
-static L2_CTL_ATTR_RW(l2_tag_latency, l2_ctl_latency, L2_TAG_STALL);
-static L2_CTL_ATTR_RW(l2_data_latency, l2_ctl_latency, L2_DATA_STALL);
-
-static struct attribute *l2_ctl_sysfs_attrs[] = {
-	&l2_ctl_attr_l2_ws_latency.dev_attr.attr,
-	&l2_ctl_attr_l2_tag_latency.dev_attr.attr,
-	&l2_ctl_attr_l2_data_latency.dev_attr.attr,
-	NULL
-};
-ATTRIBUTE_GROUPS(l2_ctl_sysfs);
-
-static void l2_ctl_remove_sysfs(void *data)
-{
-	struct l2_ctl *l2 = data;
-
-	device_remove_groups(l2->dev, l2_ctl_sysfs_groups);
-}
-
-static int l2_ctl_init_sysfs(struct l2_ctl *l2)
-{
-	int ret;
-
-	ret = device_add_groups(l2->dev, l2_ctl_sysfs_groups);
-	if (ret) {
-		dev_err(l2->dev, "Failed to create L2 CTL sysfs nodes\n");
-		return ret;
-	}
-
-	ret = devm_add_action_or_reset(l2->dev, l2_ctl_remove_sysfs, l2);
-	if (ret)
-		dev_err(l2->dev, "Can't add L2 CTL sysfs remove action\n");
-
-	return ret;
-}
-
-static int l2_ctl_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
-{
-	struct l2_ctl *l2;
-	int ret;
-
-	l2 = l2_ctl_create_data(pdev);
-	if (IS_ERR(l2))
-		return PTR_ERR(l2);
-
-	ret = l2_ctl_find_sys_regs(l2);
-	if (ret)
-		return ret;
-
-	ret = l2_ctl_of_parse(l2);
-	if (ret)
-		return ret;
-
-	ret = l2_ctl_init_sysfs(l2);
-	if (ret)
-		return ret;
-
-	return 0;
-}
-
-static const struct of_device_id l2_ctl_of_match[] = {
-	{ .compatible = "baikal,bt1-l2-ctl" },
-	{ }
-};
-MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, l2_ctl_of_match);
-
-static struct platform_driver l2_ctl_driver = {
-	.probe = l2_ctl_probe,
-	.driver = {
-		.name = "bt1-l2-ctl",
-		.of_match_table = l2_ctl_of_match
-	}
-};
-module_platform_driver(l2_ctl_driver);
-
-MODULE_AUTHOR("Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru>");
-MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Baikal-T1 L2-cache driver");
-- 
2.50.1

Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] memory: bt1-l2-ctl: Remove not-going-to-be-supported code for Baikal SoC

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 24/02/2026 16:05, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> As noticed in the discussion [1] the Baikal SoC and platforms
> are not going to be finalized, hence remove stale code.
> 
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/22b92ddf-6321-41b5-8073-f9c7064d3432@infradead.org/ [1]
> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> 
> v2: dropped DT bindings change (Krzysztof)
> 

I think we misunderstood each other. I was speaking about that feedback:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20260223185754.GA151596-robh@kernel.org/

so bindings are separate patches.

Was there any other feedback?

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] memory: bt1-l2-ctl: Remove not-going-to-be-supported code for Baikal SoC

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 04:18:36PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 24/02/2026 16:05, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > As noticed in the discussion [1] the Baikal SoC and platforms
> > are not going to be finalized, hence remove stale code.
> > 
> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/22b92ddf-6321-41b5-8073-f9c7064d3432@infradead.org/ [1]
> > Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> > 
> > v2: dropped DT bindings change (Krzysztof)
> > 
> 
> I think we misunderstood each other. I was speaking about that feedback:
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20260223185754.GA151596-robh@kernel.org/
> 
> so bindings are separate patches.
> 
> Was there any other feedback?

Now you are totally confused me.
I did what you asked, I split bindings removal to a separate patch. The code is
also removed in this patch. What do you want?

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] memory: bt1-l2-ctl: Remove not-going-to-be-supported code for Baikal SoC

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 05:24:38PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 04:18:36PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On 24/02/2026 16:05, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > As noticed in the discussion [1] the Baikal SoC and platforms
> > > are not going to be finalized, hence remove stale code.
> > > 
> > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/22b92ddf-6321-41b5-8073-f9c7064d3432@infradead.org/ [1]
> > > Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> > > ---
> > > 
> > > v2: dropped DT bindings change (Krzysztof)
> > > 
> > 
> > I think we misunderstood each other. I was speaking about that feedback:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20260223185754.GA151596-robh@kernel.org/
> > 
> > so bindings are separate patches.
> > 
> > Was there any other feedback?
> 
> Now you are totally confused me.
> I did what you asked, I split bindings removal to a separate patch. The code is
> also removed in this patch. What do you want?

Bindings removal _separate_ patch:
https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260224152711.3615622-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com


-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] memory: bt1-l2-ctl: Remove not-going-to-be-supported code for Baikal SoC

[Randy Dunlap]

On 2/24/26 7:05 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> As noticed in the discussion [1] the Baikal SoC and platforms
> are not going to be finalized, hence remove stale code.
> 
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/22b92ddf-6321-41b5-8073-f9c7064d3432@infradead.org/ [1]
> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> 
> v2: dropped DT bindings change (Krzysztof)
> 
>  drivers/memory/Kconfig      |  11 --
>  drivers/memory/Makefile     |   1 -
>  drivers/memory/bt1-l2-ctl.c | 323 ------------------------------------
>  3 files changed, 335 deletions(-)
>  delete mode 100644 drivers/memory/bt1-l2-ctl.c

Reviewed-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>

-- 
~Randy

Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] memory: bt1-l2-ctl: Remove not-going-to-be-supported code for Baikal SoC

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 24/02/2026 16:29, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 05:24:38PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 04:18:36PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 24/02/2026 16:05, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>>> As noticed in the discussion [1] the Baikal SoC and platforms
>>>> are not going to be finalized, hence remove stale code.
>>>>
>>>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/22b92ddf-6321-41b5-8073-f9c7064d3432@infradead.org/ [1]
>>>> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> v2: dropped DT bindings change (Krzysztof)
>>>>
>>>
>>> I think we misunderstood each other. I was speaking about that feedback:
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20260223185754.GA151596-robh@kernel.org/
>>>
>>> so bindings are separate patches.
>>>
>>> Was there any other feedback?
>>
>> Now you are totally confused me.
>> I did what you asked, I split bindings removal to a separate patch. The code is
>> also removed in this patch. What do you want?
> 
> Bindings removal _separate_ patch:
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260224152711.3615622-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com

Separate patch in these patch series! The ABI documentation ALWAYS goes
with the implementation. Every patch on LKML follows that rule and also
it is explicitly documented in DT submitting patches.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] memory: bt1-l2-ctl: Remove not-going-to-be-supported code for Baikal SoC

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Wed, Feb 25, 2026 at 09:02:34AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 24/02/2026 16:29, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 05:24:38PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >> On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 04:18:36PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >>> On 24/02/2026 16:05, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >>>> As noticed in the discussion [1] the Baikal SoC and platforms
> >>>> are not going to be finalized, hence remove stale code.
> >>>>
> >>>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/22b92ddf-6321-41b5-8073-f9c7064d3432@infradead.org/ [1]
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> >>>> ---
> >>>>
> >>>> v2: dropped DT bindings change (Krzysztof)
> >>>
> >>> I think we misunderstood each other. I was speaking about that feedback:
> >>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20260223185754.GA151596-robh@kernel.org/
> >>>
> >>> so bindings are separate patches.
> >>>
> >>> Was there any other feedback?
> >>
> >> Now you are totally confused me.
> >> I did what you asked, I split bindings removal to a separate patch. The code is
> >> also removed in this patch. What do you want?
> > 
> > Bindings removal _separate_ patch:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260224152711.3615622-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com
> 
> Separate patch in these patch series! The ABI documentation ALWAYS goes
> with the implementation. Every patch on LKML follows that rule and also
> it is explicitly documented in DT submitting patches.

I see, it seems too hard to do this right from the start.
Thanks for elaboration!

I will address this concern in v3.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] memory: bt1-l2-ctl: Remove not-going-to-be-supported code for Baikal SoC

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 25/02/2026 10:23, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2026 at 09:02:34AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 24/02/2026 16:29, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 05:24:38PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 04:18:36PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>> On 24/02/2026 16:05, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>>>>> As noticed in the discussion [1] the Baikal SoC and platforms
>>>>>> are not going to be finalized, hence remove stale code.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/22b92ddf-6321-41b5-8073-f9c7064d3432@infradead.org/ [1]
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>
>>>>>> v2: dropped DT bindings change (Krzysztof)
>>>>>
>>>>> I think we misunderstood each other. I was speaking about that feedback:
>>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20260223185754.GA151596-robh@kernel.org/
>>>>>
>>>>> so bindings are separate patches.
>>>>>
>>>>> Was there any other feedback?
>>>>
>>>> Now you are totally confused me.
>>>> I did what you asked, I split bindings removal to a separate patch. The code is
>>>> also removed in this patch. What do you want?
>>>
>>> Bindings removal _separate_ patch:
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260224152711.3615622-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com
>>
>> Separate patch in these patch series! The ABI documentation ALWAYS goes
>> with the implementation. Every patch on LKML follows that rule and also
>> it is explicitly documented in DT submitting patches.
> 
> I see, it seems too hard to do this right from the start.

Just like reverts of multiple commits are going in reversed order of
commits, then this is done in exact reverse order, so you can simply
look at any other patchset and do the reverse. Just took the latets from:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/

So this is adding:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20260225-ina4230-v1-0-92b1de981d46@flipper.net/T/#m7817a527e6819c9383456aeaa0fe22f86e470d6f

and removing would be exact revert, reverse order, with of course
appropriate subjects and commit msgs.


Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] memory: bt1-l2-ctl: Remove not-going-to-be-supported code for Baikal SoC

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Wed, Feb 25, 2026 at 10:33:56AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 25/02/2026 10:23, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 25, 2026 at 09:02:34AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >> On 24/02/2026 16:29, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 05:24:38PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >>>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2026 at 04:18:36PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >>>>> On 24/02/2026 16:05, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >>>>>> As noticed in the discussion [1] the Baikal SoC and platforms
> >>>>>> are not going to be finalized, hence remove stale code.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/22b92ddf-6321-41b5-8073-f9c7064d3432@infradead.org/ [1]
> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> >>>>>> ---
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> v2: dropped DT bindings change (Krzysztof)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I think we misunderstood each other. I was speaking about that feedback:
> >>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20260223185754.GA151596-robh@kernel.org/
> >>>>>
> >>>>> so bindings are separate patches.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Was there any other feedback?
> >>>>
> >>>> Now you are totally confused me.
> >>>> I did what you asked, I split bindings removal to a separate patch. The code is
> >>>> also removed in this patch. What do you want?
> >>>
> >>> Bindings removal _separate_ patch:
> >>> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260224152711.3615622-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com
> >>
> >> Separate patch in these patch series! The ABI documentation ALWAYS goes
> >> with the implementation. Every patch on LKML follows that rule and also
> >> it is explicitly documented in DT submitting patches.
> > 
> > I see, it seems too hard to do this right from the start.
> 
> Just like reverts of multiple commits are going in reversed order of
> commits, then this is done in exact reverse order, so you can simply
> look at any other patchset and do the reverse. Just took the latets from:
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/
> 
> So this is adding:
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20260225-ina4230-v1-0-92b1de981d46@flipper.net/T/#m7817a527e6819c9383456aeaa0fe22f86e470d6f
> 
> and removing would be exact revert, reverse order, with of course
> appropriate subjects and commit msgs.

These can't be done as pure set of reverts. This needs a manual work.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] memory: bt1-l2-ctl: Remove not-going-to-be-supported code for Baikal SoC

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 25/02/2026 10:39, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>>> Separate patch in these patch series! The ABI documentation ALWAYS goes
>>>> with the implementation. Every patch on LKML follows that rule and also
>>>> it is explicitly documented in DT submitting patches.
>>>
>>> I see, it seems too hard to do this right from the start.
>>
>> Just like reverts of multiple commits are going in reversed order of
>> commits, then this is done in exact reverse order, so you can simply
>> look at any other patchset and do the reverse. Just took the latets from:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/
>>
>> So this is adding:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20260225-ina4230-v1-0-92b1de981d46@flipper.net/T/#m7817a527e6819c9383456aeaa0fe22f86e470d6f
>>
>> and removing would be exact revert, reverse order, with of course
>> appropriate subjects and commit msgs.
> 
> These can't be done as pure set of reverts. This needs a manual work.

I understand, I wanted to explain how to deduce the proper flow.

> 


Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] memory: bt1-l2-ctl: Remove not-going-to-be-supported code for Baikal SoC

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Wed, Feb 25, 2026 at 10:45:22AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 25/02/2026 10:39, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >>>> Separate patch in these patch series! The ABI documentation ALWAYS goes
> >>>> with the implementation. Every patch on LKML follows that rule and also
> >>>> it is explicitly documented in DT submitting patches.
> >>>
> >>> I see, it seems too hard to do this right from the start.
> >>
> >> Just like reverts of multiple commits are going in reversed order of
> >> commits, then this is done in exact reverse order, so you can simply
> >> look at any other patchset and do the reverse. Just took the latets from:
> >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/
> >>
> >> So this is adding:
> >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20260225-ina4230-v1-0-92b1de981d46@flipper.net/T/#m7817a527e6819c9383456aeaa0fe22f86e470d6f
> >>
> >> and removing would be exact revert, reverse order, with of course
> >> appropriate subjects and commit msgs.
> > 
> > These can't be done as pure set of reverts. This needs a manual work.
> 
> I understand, I wanted to explain how to deduce the proper flow.

Got it, thank you!

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko