[PATCH v6 00/13] mtd: rawnand: brcmnand: driver and doc updates

[Florian Fainelli]

On 3/14/24 15:04, Miquel Raynal wrote:
> Hi Florian,
> 
> miquel.raynal at bootlin.com wrote on Thu, 29 Feb 2024 10:11:01 +0100:
> 
>> Hi Florian,
>>
>> florian.fainelli at broadcom.com wrote on Mon, 26 Feb 2024 09:36:02 -0800:
>>
>>> On 2/22/24 19:47, William Zhang wrote:
>>>> This patch series is an update from the previous version [1] after
>>>> exex_op support and fixes (patch 1 to 4 from the previous version.)
>>>>
>>>> It updates all the BCMBCA SoC to support the nand controller and add
>>>> functions to handle BCMBCA specific needs on ECC and Write Protection
>>>> usage. The device tree document is also updated accordingly with the new
>>>> properties needed by the driver.
>>>>
>>>> In addition there is a bug fix for exec_op helper functions, log level
>>>> adjustment on uncorrectable ECC error and some coding style fixes.
>>>>
>>>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230606231252.94838-1-william.zhang@broadcom.com/
>>>
>>> Miquel, thanks for having applied the patches, we should have discussed ahead of time whether you should take the SoC/board-level DTS changes through your tree or mine, but it's fine either way and should not lead to conflicts in Linus' tree.
>>
>> I'm sorry for not thinking about this ahead of time, I was also not
>> Cced on the other patches, I noticed it (told Willliam) and just forgot
>> about this when I applied the series.
>>
>> It is currently living in -next so if there is any problem I can still
>> act.
>>
>> However for this kind of change I usually apply the bindings and .c
>> changes independently from the DT patches. I believe there is no
>> problem having one or the other being merged first, or do I overlook
>> something?
> 
> What the heck /o\ I just understand now my mistake, I am very truly
> sorry for that...
> 
> You were telling me I should sync with you before taking DT changes,
> and I was so convinced I _did_not_ take the DT, when I looked at the
> branch I did not understand your point. But I am totally sorry I
> actually did take the DTs by mistake and I truly did not notice it.
> Confirmation bias I suppose. My very sincere apologies.
> 
> As mentioned previously, I was not CC'ed on the DT patches, but I
> believe the linux-mtd list was, so the patches didn't appear in my
> inbox, and once I was happy with the binding/driver changes I applied
> it all without noticing the DT changes had sneaked in.
> 
> I'm finally preparing the PR for Linus and I see it now...
> 
> I believe the SoC tree is closed now so it's up to you what I should do
> with them. Let me know if you want me to keep them in my tree and
> forward them to Linus or if I should drop them and you'll take them for
> the next cycle. Also, if I keep them, shall I add some tag of yours on
> these 3 patches? For the record I did not review them.

Yes please add my:

Acked-by: Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli at broadcom.com>

tag, and it's fine I don't expect that we will get conflicts for those 
files.

> 
> Thanks and again, I'm confused. I never apply DT patches like that,
> your initial remark was more than legitimate.

Not a problem!
-- 
Florian