Re: [PATCH 04/23] arm: dts: k3-am642-sk: Fix mmc1 pinmux pull polarity

Roger Quadros
2023-04-17T11:45:20Z

On 17/04/2023 14:12, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> On 13:42-20230417, Roger Quadros wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 14/04/2023 10:57, Nishanth Menon wrote:
>>> Fix the pinmux pull polarity.
>>>
>>> This is a pending upstream kernel updates as of v6.3-rc6.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>
>>> ---
>>> Sent to kernel.org https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20230414073328.381336-1-nm@ti.com/
>>
>> Link to actual patch is
>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20230414073328.381336-3-nm@ti.com/
>>
>>>
>>> arch/arm/dts/k3-am642-sk.dts | 16 +++++++++-------
>>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/dts/k3-am642-sk.dts b/arch/arm/dts/k3-am642-sk.dts
>>> index 4fb279489cfc..cc2027417e86 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm/dts/k3-am642-sk.dts
>>> +++ b/arch/arm/dts/k3-am642-sk.dts
>>> @@ -223,15 +223,17 @@
>>>
>>> &main_pmx0 {
>>> main_mmc1_pins_default: main-mmc1-pins-default {
>>> + /* XXX: Kernel-Upstream: TODO: Upstream (pull changes) */
>>
>> Do we really want to sprinkle these comments in u-boot upstream?
>
> I have no other means to indicate that these nodes need to get to
> upstream kernel and when they do get into upstream kernel, what needs to
> be dropped from u-boot.
>
> I am open to suggestions here.
>
>> If we are quite sure this makes to upstream kernel we might as well pull them into
>> u-boot as is.
>
> No, that has been the reason why the entire dt mismatch occurred in the
> first place. the subjective evaluation from various devs have been way
> off. if it makes it to kernel.org master, only then can we claim that
> the changes are in upstream.

In that case we do not accept any DT patches in u-boot till at least
Acked by kernel maintainer?