[PATCH v8 04/18] dt-bindings: pinctrl: add Ambarella CV75 pinctrl

[Linus Walleij]

On Mon, Oct 12, 2026 at 9:08 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk at kernel.org> wrote:
> On 12/10/2026 09:06, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 9, 2026 at 8:17 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk at kernel.org> wrote:
> >> On 01/10/2026 09:03, Linus Walleij wrote:
> >
> >>> On Mon, Sep 21, 2026 at 6:23 AM Long Zhao via B4 Relay
> >>> <devnull+longzhao.ambarella.com at kernel.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> From: Long Zhao <longzhao at ambarella.com>
> >>>>
> >>>> Document the CV75 pin controller binding using generic function and
> >>>> groups properties for pinmux configuration.
> >>>>
> >>>> Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linusw at kernel.org>
> >>>> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski at oss.qualcomm.com>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Long Zhao <longzhao at ambarella.com>
> >>>
> >>> This patch 4/18 applied to the pinctrl tree.
> >>
> >> There is a dependency, you cannot take this patch alone.
> >
> > Oops, but is it a DTS dependency so if none of the other patches go in through
>
> No, it is a bindings dependency, introducing new DT bindings warning for
> both your tree and next.

Is there a problem with the bindings patch itself?

In that case Long can just send an incremental patch to
fix it right?

> Your tree is fine in this case as long as next
> is also fine... but next is not, because that patch did not make it there.

But the patch is in -next?

~/linux-next$ ls
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ambarella,cv75-pinctrl.yaml
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/ambarella,cv75-pinctrl.yaml

> We cannot have any new DT bindings warnings in next.

I guess I just don't get it :D

To me it seems like a fairly normal situation: ACKed bindings merged
together with the driver, no dependence on anything.

But if you tell me "revert the patch" I will simply revert the patch
because I trust you, it doesn't really matter why.

Yours,
Linus Walleij