RE: mtd: spi-nor: fsl-quadspi: add support for ls1021a

[Yao Yuan]

On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 11:42 PM, Han Xu < xhnjupt@xxxxxxxxx > wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 1:53 AM, Yuan Yao <yao.yuan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > This patch set is used for add the fsl-quadspi support for ls1021a and
> > ls1043a, so remove the patch:
> > mtd: spi-nor: fsl-quadspi: extend support for some special requerment.
> 
> Please use --cover-letter to generate cover letter.
> 
> >
> > This patch will be send with anther patch set for add QSPI support on LS2080A.
> >
> > All the new property are document in anther patch set which is already
> > send to linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Here is the patch name:
> > 0001-Documentation-fsl-quadspi-Add-fsl-ls2080a-dspi-compa.patch
> > 0002-Documentation-fsl-quadspi-Add-fsl-ls2080a-qspi-compa.patch
> > 0003-dts-ls2080a-update-the-DTS-for-QSPI-and-DSPI-support.patch
> > 0004-Documentation-fsl-quadspi-Add-optional-properties.patch
> >
> > Any extra information you can find them on the patchwork:
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8078931/
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8078951/
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8079091/
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8078941/
> 
> Please send all patches in one patch set, this is not acceptable.
> 

Thanks for your review.
But those patches are dts binding patch. And will send to  devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and some corresponding maintainer.

Those two patch sets will send to different mail-list and maintainers separately.

So, maybe it's better to send the patch to the maintainer accordingly and thus I think can also reduce the workload of maintainer.

How about your think?

Thanks.

Yuan Yao.