RE: [PATCH v3 0/6] Prerequisites for NXP LS104xA SMMU enablement

[Laurentiu Tudor]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andreas FÃrber <afaerber@xxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, May 31, 2019 8:04 PM
> 
> Hello Laurentiu,
> 
> Am 31.05.19 um 18:46 schrieb Laurentiu Tudor:
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Andreas FÃrber <afaerber@xxxxxxx>
> >> Sent: Friday, May 31, 2019 7:15 PM
> >>
> >> Hi Laurentiu,
> >>
> >> Am 30.05.19 um 16:19 schrieb laurentiu.tudor@xxxxxxx:
> >>> This patch series contains several fixes in preparation for SMMU
> >>> support on NXP LS1043A and LS1046A chips. Once these get picked up,
> >>> I'll submit the actual SMMU enablement patches consisting in the
> >>> required device tree changes.
> >>
> >> Have you thought through what will happen if this patch ordering is not
> >> preserved? In particular, a user installing a future U-Boot update with
> >> the DTB bits but booting a stable kernel without this patch series -
> >> wouldn't that regress dpaa then for our customers?
> >>
> >
> > These are fixes for issues that popped out after enabling SMMU.
> > I do not expect them to break anything.
> 
> That was not my question! You're missing my point: All your patches are
> lacking a Fixes header in their commit message, for backporting them, to
> avoid _your DT patches_ breaking the driver on stable branches!

It does appear that I'm missing your point. For sure, the DT updates solely will
break the kernel without these fixes but I'm not sure I understand how this
could happen. My plan was to share the kernel dts patches sometime after this series
makes it through.

---
Best Regards, Laurentiu