Re: [PATCH v3 1/6] dt-bindings: pinctrl: qcom: rename spi0 pins on IPQ5424

[Manikanta Mylavarapu]

On 12/27/2024 3:00 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 27/12/2024 10:18, Manikanta Mylavarapu wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 12/27/2024 1:06 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 27/12/2024 08:24, Manikanta Mylavarapu wrote:
>>>> SPI protocol runs on serial engine 4. Hence rename
>>>> spi0 pins to spi4 like spi0_cs to spi4_cs etc.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Manikanta Mylavarapu <quic_mmanikan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>
>>>
>>> <form letter>
>>> This is a friendly reminder during the review process.
>>>
>>> It looks like you received a tag and forgot to add it.
>>>
>>> If you do not know the process, here is a short explanation:
>>> Please add Acked-by/Reviewed-by/Tested-by tags when posting new versions
>>> of patchset, under or above your Signed-off-by tag, unless patch changed
>>> significantly (e.g. new properties added to the DT bindings). Tag is
>>> "received", when provided in a message replied to you on the mailing
>>> list. Tools like b4 can help here. However, there's no need to repost
>>> patches *only* to add the tags. The upstream maintainer will do that for
>>> tags received on the version they apply.
>>>
>>> Please read:
>>> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.12-rc3/source/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst#L577
>>>
>>> If a tag was not added on purpose, please state why and what changed.
>>> </form letter>
>>>
>>
>> Hi Krzysztof,
>>
>> 	Patches #1 to #4 are newly added in V3 (to rename SPI0 to SPI4). Hence, there are no A-b/R-b
>> 	tags associated with these patches. I mentioned this information in the cover letter.
>> 	
>> 	I assume you are referring to Patch #1 from the V2 series.
>> 	Patch #1 [1] and #2 [2] from the V2 series have been merged into linux-next.
>> 	[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20241217091308.3253897-2-quic_mmanikan@xxxxxxxxxxx/
>> 	[2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20241217091308.3253897-3-quic_mmanikan@xxxxxxxxxxx/
>>
>> 	Please let me know if i missed anything.
> 
> v3 mislead me here and three different subsystems in one patchset.
> 
> Anyway, if this is different patch then review follows - there is no ABI
> impact explanation and this is an ABI break. What's more, entries are
> not sorted anymore and why there is a gap? spi4, spi1 and spi10? Where
> is spi3?
> 
> Not sure if this renaming is useful or correct, especially considering
> not many arguments in commit msg (e.g. datasheet?).
> 
> 

Hi Krzysztof,

	The IPQ5424 supports two SPI instances on serial engine 4 and 5.
	Previously, SPI clocks, gpio pins and DTS node names were named
	according to protocol instances like spi0 and spi1.

	As per the feedback received in
	https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/ca0ecc07-fd45-4116-9927-8eb3e737505f@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/,
	spi0 has been renamed to spi4 to align with the serial engine instance.

	Kindly advice if it's not acceptable.

Thanks & Regards,
Manikanta.