Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] sdhci: sparx5: Add Sparx5 SoC eMMC driver
From: Ulf Hansson
Date: Fri Jul 24 2020 - 08:44:21 EST
On Fri, 24 Jul 2020 at 13:32, Lars Povlsen <lars.povlsen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Ulf Hansson writes:
> > On Wed, 22 Jul 2020 at 13:54, Lars Povlsen <lars.povlsen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> Adrian Hunter writes:
> >> > On 18/06/20 5:13 pm, Lars Povlsen wrote:
> >> >> This adds the eMMC driver for the Sparx5 SoC. It is based upon the
> >> >> designware IP, but requires some extra initialization and quirks.
> >> >>
> >> >> Signed-off-by: Lars Povlsen <lars.povlsen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> >
> >> > Acked-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> >
> >> Adrian,
> >> Thanks for the ack. I was expecting to see this in linux-next, anything
> >> holding it back?
> >> pinctrl and hwmon drivers have been merged.
> >> Thanks,
> > Hi Lars,
> > Looks like you got some feedback on the DT patch (patch1/3) from Rob.
> > I didn't find that you have addressed them and therefore I am holding
> > back on the $subject patch as well.
> Uffe, thank you for responding.
> The automated checker complains about the inclusion of a header file
> (#include <dt-bindings/clock/microchip,sparx5.h>) in the example. The
> header file itself is part of the "parent" patch series sent to arm-soc,
> but is needed to make the example complete.
> I e-mailed Rob about how to handle this, but never got a reply.
> Can you suggest how to deal with this? I have checked the schema with
> dt_binding_check manually - with the header file in place.
I see, thanks for clarifying.
When this kind of dependy happens, we have a couple of options.
1. Wait for a new rc to have the dependent changes included.
2. Share the changes between maintainers's git trees, through
Looks like 1) would be easiest here. So, I suggest you re-post the
series when v5.9-rc1 is out.
> I can of course remove the include and associated properties, but that
> will make the example incomplete and irrelevant.
No, that doesn't sound right.