Re: [PATCH v5 2/8] phy: miphy28lp: Add PHY header file for DT x Driver defines

[Lee Jones]

On Thu, 06 Nov 2014, Maxime Coquelin wrote:
> On 11/06/2014 04:36 PM, Lee Jones wrote:
> >On Thu, 06 Nov 2014, Maxime Coquelin wrote:
> >>On 11/06/2014 12:28 PM, Lee Jones wrote:
> >>>On Thu, 06 Nov 2014, Maxime Coquelin wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>Hi Kishon,
> >>>>On 11/06/2014 07:59 AM, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
> >>>>>Hi,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>On Tuesday 04 November 2014 04:21 PM, Gabriel FERNANDEZ wrote:
> >>>>>>This provides the shared header file which will be reference from both
> >>>>>>PHY driver and its associated Device Tree node(s).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Signed-off-by: Gabriel Fernandez <gabriel.fernandez@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>>>---
> >>>>>>  include/dt-bindings/phy/phy.h | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
> >>>>>I don't see this being used in device tree file. Are you planning to add this
> >>>>>after -rc1 is tagged. Or else I have to create a separate branch for this file
> >>>>>which will be merged by both me and the dt maintainer. Let me know.
> >>>>I think we don't need to create a branch we will merged by both of us.
> >>>>
> >>>>What we can do that both of us apply this patch in our trees.
> >>>>It will avoid dependencies on each others.
> >>>>
> >>>>What do you think?
> >>>This makes no sense to me.  Can you find another way to explain this
> >>>please?
> >>I apply the patch on my STi tree.
> >>Kishon applies the patch on his phy tree.
> >>
> >>At the end, both STi and phy branches will be merged in Linus tree,
> >>with no conflicts.
> >>
> >>This is what we are doing for the STiH407 reset DT bindings with Philipp Z.
> >If you do that, you will almost certainly get conflicts.  The commits
> >have to share the same SHA1 for Git to know for sure that they are the
> >same patch.  One of you needs to create a branch and tag it.  The
> >other can then merge the tag _then_ you won't get conflicts.
> 
> Just made the test on my side, and I don't get any conflict.
> In my test, the two SHA-1 were different.

If the merge turns out to be simple, then Git will do the correct
thing; however, if the first version of the patch is applied, then
some changes around the same area of the file occur _then_ when the
second version (of the same patch differing only by SHA1) is applied
Git will get confused.  If it has the same SHA1 however, Git will
discard it as 'already applied'.  This is the reason we pass around
shared tags to immutable branches.

> >>>>>Thanks
> >>>>>Kishon
> >>>>>>  1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)
> >>>>>>  create mode 100644 include/dt-bindings/phy/phy.h
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/phy/phy.h b/include/dt-bindings/phy/phy.h
> >>>>>>new file mode 100644
> >>>>>>index 0000000..e8c6a3f
> >>>>>>--- /dev/null
> >>>>>>+++ b/include/dt-bindings/phy/phy.h
> >>>>>>@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
> >>>>>>+/*
> >>>>>>+ *
> >>>>>>+ * This header provides constants for the phy framework
> >>>>>>+ *
> >>>>>>+ * Copyright (C) 2014 STMicroelectronics
> >>>>>>+ * Author: Gabriel Fernandez <gabriel.fernandez@xxxxxx>
> >>>>>>+ * License terms:  GNU General Public License (GPL), version 2
> >>>>>>+ */
> >>>>>>+
> >>>>>>+#ifndef _DT_BINDINGS_PHY
> >>>>>>+#define _DT_BINDINGS_PHY
> >>>>>>+
> >>>>>>+#define PHY_TYPE_SATA		1
> >>>>>>+#define PHY_TYPE_PCIE		2
> >>>>>>+#define PHY_TYPE_USB2		3
> >>>>>>+#define PHY_TYPE_USB3		4
> >>>>>>+
> >>>>>>+#endif /* _DT_BINDINGS_PHY */
> >>>>>>
> 

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org â Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/