[PATCH 0/3] ARM: shmobile: sh-eth pins in DT for armadillo800eva
laurent.pinchart at ideasonboard.com
Fri Jan 25 04:57:08 EST 2013
On Friday 25 January 2013 18:05:44 Simon Horman wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 09:09:54AM +0100, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> > On Fri, 25 Jan 2013, Simon Horman wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 05:07:30PM +0100, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> > > > This patch series gets rid of gpio_request()-style ethernet pin
> > > > configuration on armadillo800eva in reference implementation.
> > >
> > > Hi Guennadi,
> > >
> > > these changes seem to be reasonable to me.
> > >
> > > Are there any dependencies for the sh_eth patch?
> > > I assume this will be handled by David Miller through the net-next tree.
> > > Are there any dependencies? The last time I checked the DT bindings
> > > for sh_eth had not been merged.
> > Obviously, it can only be applied, if the
> > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/sh_ether.txt file and the
> > sh_eth_parse_dt() function exist. Also, if there are no objections against
> > the new phy-reset-gpios DT property. Otherwise there are no dependencies -
> > as long as the phy-reset-gpios property isn't found in DT, the patch
> > doesn't affect the driver.
> Thanks, I'm slightly concerned that the other patch(es) relating
> to Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/sh_ether.txt have gone missing in
> Do you have an interest in chasing them down or would you like me to?
> > > For the remaining two patches, which I assume will go through my renesas
> > > tree:
> > > * Are there any dependencies that aren't satisfied by the of-intc
> > > branch?
> > AFAICS, that your branch doesn't contain Laurent's pinctrl patches, which
> > are needed for patch 1 to apply and for patch 3 to make sense. My earlier
> > MMC DT / pinctrl patches aren't required for these patches to function,
> > but these patches won't apply cleanly without them, since they touch the
> > same code fragments. So, it would be easier to merge them in the order of
> > submission.
> > > * Could you get some Acks. At least from Laurent?
> > Sure, let's give reviewers some more time :)
> Laurent, if there are patches ready for me to take into the renesas tree
> please let me know. I'm reluctant to add any more pinmux changes for 3.9.
> But if a topic branch would help let me know.
I'd like the gpio_request_one() patches to go to v3.9 if possible. The other
pinctrl patches will need to wait until v3.10 I'm afraid.
More information about the linux-arm-kernel