Re: [PATCH 0/3] pinctrl: scmi: support i.MX95 OEM extensions with fsl,pins property

[Sudeep Holla]

On Tue, Jun 04, 2024 at 12:49:13AM +0000, Peng Fan wrote:
> Hi Sudeep,
>
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] pinctrl: scmi: support i.MX95 OEM extensions with
> > fsl,pins property
> >
> > On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 08:36:27AM +0000, Peng Fan wrote:
> > > Hi Linus, Sudeep, Cristian,
> > >
> > > > Subject: [PATCH 0/3] pinctrl: scmi: support i.MX95 OEM extensions
> > > > with fsl,pins property
> > >
> > > Sorry if this is an early ping to you. Just wanna this not blocking
> > > i.MX95 upstream support.
> > >
> >
> > I would say yes as this was posted bang in the middle of the merge window.
> > So it is possible for people to miss this if they are busy otherwise.
> >
> > I wouldn't have responded in general or if someone is new to the Linux kernel
> > development. But you are no new to kernel development.
> >
> > In general I also have a suggestion for you. Avoid churning the dependent
> > patch series if the base set of patches are not yet reviewed or agreed upon.
> > I was super confused with the amount of different concurrent but dependent
> > patch series you had for this whole i.MX SCMI pinmux support. I had ignored
> > and not responded in the past but thought it would be good to respond in
> > this thread.
>
> Thanks for your suggestion.  I tried to do different implementations that
> could make all of us agree, so it was indeed many versions with different
> implementations. Sorry. I will improve.
>

Thanks and sorry again if it is harsh but it was indeed confusing.

> BTW: would you please also give an ACK for patch 3, because patch 3 uses
> module_scmi_driver?

Done.

--
Regards,
Sudeep