Re: [PATCH v8 0/2] Add support for Gunyah Watchdog

[Hrishabh Rajput]

On 12/2/2025 9:29 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 02/12/2025 12:23, Hrishabh Rajput wrote:
> > Hi Bjorn, Guenter, and Wim,
> >
> > Just a gentle ping on this series.
>
> It's merge window. There was no point in pinging just before merge
> window and is even worse to ping now. Nothing can happen with this
> patchset and such pings is only noise.

Thanks for the guidance and apologies for the noise created during the 
merge window.

> > Since the patches have received Reviewed-by tags from Dmitry and
> > Guenter, I wanted to confirm the merge strategy.
> >
> > Bjorn: Are you planning to pick the QCOM SCM changes separately through
> > your tree, or would you prefer the whole series go through the Watchdog
> > tree?
> > If the latter, do we need an explicit Acked-by from you for QCOM SCM patch?
>
> Where did you document dependencies between patches and any non-obvious
> merging? I open cover letter and there is NOTHING. I look at patch
> changelog and also NOTHING.
>
> So if you tell us nothing, why would we care to think we need to do
> anything special here?
>
> You must explicitly document every dependency, both external and between
> patches, in the cover letter. At least cover letter, some people (e.g.
> mostly me) don't even read them...

This is a miss from my end. The following information should have been 
the part of the cover letter:
```
This series spans 2 subsystems and is split as follows:
- Patch 1: QCOM SCM - Register Gunyah Watchdog Platform device
- Patch 2: Watchdog - Add Gunyah Watchdog driver

Dependency:
There is no build-time dependency between the patches, but Patch 1 is 
required for Patch 2 to function.

Merge strategies:
- Strategy 1: Take both patches via the Watchdog tree.
- Strategy 2: Take Patch 1 via QCM SCM maintainter's tree, Patch 2 via 
Watchdog tree.

Since the patches concern primarily with the Watchdog, I suggest we go 
ahead with Strategy 1. If this is acceptable, I request an Acked-by from 
QCOM SCM maintainer for Patch 1.
```

I understand that this should have been a part of the cover letter. If 
it helps the process, I can add the above information in the cover 
letter and resend as v9. Since there are no other fixes, v9 would only 
contain the cover letter changes.

Thanks,
Hrishabh