Re: [GIT PULL 6/7] arm64: tegra: Device tree changes for v7.1-rc1

Krzysztof Kozlowski
2026-03-31T08:00:04Z

On 31/03/2026 09:53, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 30, 2026 at 01:45:24PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 29/03/2026 17:10, Thierry Reding wrote:
>>> From: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
>>>
>>> Hi ARM SoC maintainers,
>>>
>>> The following changes since commit 6de23f81a5e08be8fbf5e8d7e9febc72a5b5f27f:
>>>
>>> Linux 7.0-rc1 (2026-02-22 13:18:59 -0800)
>>>
>>> are available in the Git repository at:
>>>
>>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tegra/linux.git tags/tegra-for-7.1-arm64-dt
>>>
>>> for you to fetch changes up to c70e6bc11d2008fbb19695394b69fd941ab39030:
>>>
>>> arm64: tegra: Add Tegra264 GPIO controllers (2026-03-28 01:36:46 +0100)
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Thierry
>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>>> arm64: tegra: Device tree changes for v7.1-rc1
>>>
>>> Various fixes and new additions across a number of devices. GPIO and PCI
>>> are enabled on Tegra264 and the Jetson AGX Thor Developer Kit, allowing
>>> it to boot via network and mass storage.
>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Diogo Ivo (1):
>>> arm64: tegra: smaug: Enable SPI-NOR flash
>>>
>>> Jon Hunter (1):
>>> arm64: tegra: Fix RTC aliases
>>>
>>> Prathamesh Shete (1):
>>> arm64: tegra: Add Tegra264 GPIO controllers
>>>
>>> Thierry Reding (6):
>>> dt-bindings: pci: Document the NVIDIA Tegra264 PCIe controller
>>
>>
>> This is unreviewed/unacked binding where PCI maintainers had 1 day to
>> react to your v3.
>
> Rob gave a reviewed-by on this about a week ago:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-tegra/177440189257.2451552.18196101830235626115.robh@kernel.org/

Rob, although knows a lot about PCI, is not a formally a PCI subsystem
maintainer.

>
> In my experience the PCI maintainers typically defer review of the DT
> bindings to DT maintainers, so I considered Rob's R-b sufficient.

Sure and they acknowledge this, that review is done and patch can go
other way, with "Ack".

Where is the Ack?

>
>> Maybe they had more time for previous versions, but
>> nevertheless it is also part of other patchset, so it will get into the
>> kernel other tree and nothing on v3 posting:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260326135855.2795149-4-thierry.reding@kernel.org/
>> gives hints that there will be cross tree merge.
>
> Maybe look at the cover letter:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260326135855.2795149-1-thierry.reding@kernel.org/
>
> I clearly pointed out the build dependencies and suggested a shared
> branch to resolve them in both trees. Given that the bindings were

No problem, that's a valid solution. Can you point me with a lore link
to the shared branch posting (these tags/pull requests must be posted on
the lists)? Or to an ack from PCI maintainers?

The commit itself does not have an Ack, but maybe was just missed.

> reviewed by Rob and they are needed in both the subsystem tree
> (according to your own rules) as well as the DT tree (for validation),
> I included the bindings in the shared branch as well.

Best regards,
Krzysztof