| Message ID | 20220629164414.301813-1-viorel.suman@oss.nxp.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | dt-bindings: arm: freescale: Switch fsl,scu from txt to yaml | expand |
On 29/06/2022 18:44, Viorel Suman (OSS) wrote: > From: Viorel Suman <viorel.suman@nxp.com> > > Changes since v5: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220616164303.790379-1-viorel.suman@nxp.com/ > * Updated according to Krzysztof Kozlowski comments > My comment a about removal of each part of TXT bindings in each patch, was not addressed. Your approach makes it more difficult to read patches and makes sense only if each subsystem maintainer will take the patches (separately). If the patches are going through one tree, then better to remove the TXT gradually. So the question - who is going to take each of the patches? Best regards, Krzysztof
On 22-06-29 19:51:06, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 29/06/2022 18:44, Viorel Suman (OSS) wrote: > > From: Viorel Suman <viorel.suman@nxp.com> > > > > Changes since v5: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220616164303.790379-1-viorel.suman@nxp.com/ > > * Updated according to Krzysztof Kozlowski comments > > > > My comment a about removal of each part of TXT bindings in each patch, > was not addressed. Your approach makes it more difficult to read patches > and makes sense only if each subsystem maintainer will take the patches > (separately). If the patches are going through one tree, then better to > remove the TXT gradually. > > So the question - who is going to take each of the patches? Hi Krzysztof, I just understood the context of your comment, will do it in the next version. Assuming TXT is removed from aggregating TXT - fsl,scu.txt - gradually, do you expect the removed to be added into the aggregating YAML - fsl,scu.yaml - also gradually within the same patch ? Thank you, Viorel
On 30/06/2022 14:13, Viorel Suman (OSS) wrote: > On 22-06-29 19:51:06, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 29/06/2022 18:44, Viorel Suman (OSS) wrote: >>> From: Viorel Suman <viorel.suman@nxp.com> >>> >>> Changes since v5: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220616164303.790379-1-viorel.suman@nxp.com/ >>> * Updated according to Krzysztof Kozlowski comments >>> >> >> My comment a about removal of each part of TXT bindings in each patch, >> was not addressed. Your approach makes it more difficult to read patches >> and makes sense only if each subsystem maintainer will take the patches >> (separately). If the patches are going through one tree, then better to >> remove the TXT gradually. >> >> So the question - who is going to take each of the patches? > > Hi Krzysztof, > > I just understood the context of your comment, will do it in the next version. > > Assuming TXT is removed from aggregating TXT - fsl,scu.txt - gradually, do you expect the > removed to be added into the aggregating YAML - fsl,scu.yaml - also gradually within the > same patch ? Each patch making the conversion should remove the piece being converted. Then finally the patch adding fsl,scu.yaml should remove the last pieces (remaining ones). Best regards, Krzysztof
On 22-06-30 20:03:07, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 30/06/2022 14:13, Viorel Suman (OSS) wrote: > > On 22-06-29 19:51:06, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >> On 29/06/2022 18:44, Viorel Suman (OSS) wrote: > >>> From: Viorel Suman <viorel.suman@nxp.com> > >>> > >>> Changes since v5: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220616164303.790379-1-viorel.suman@nxp.com/ > >>> * Updated according to Krzysztof Kozlowski comments > >>> > >> > >> My comment a about removal of each part of TXT bindings in each patch, > >> was not addressed. Your approach makes it more difficult to read patches > >> and makes sense only if each subsystem maintainer will take the patches > >> (separately). If the patches are going through one tree, then better to > >> remove the TXT gradually. > >> > >> So the question - who is going to take each of the patches? > > > > Hi Krzysztof, > > > > I just understood the context of your comment, will do it in the next version. > > > > Assuming TXT is removed from aggregating TXT - fsl,scu.txt - gradually, do you expect the > > removed to be added into the aggregating YAML - fsl,scu.yaml - also gradually within the > > same patch ? > > Each patch making the conversion should remove the piece being > converted. Then finally the patch adding fsl,scu.yaml should remove the > last pieces (remaining ones). Thank you for clarification, will follow this approach in the next version. Regards, Viorel
On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 07:51:06PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 29/06/2022 18:44, Viorel Suman (OSS) wrote: > > From: Viorel Suman <viorel.suman@nxp.com> > > > > Changes since v5: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220616164303.790379-1-viorel.suman@nxp.com/ > > * Updated according to Krzysztof Kozlowski comments > > > > My comment a about removal of each part of TXT bindings in each patch, > was not addressed. Your approach makes it more difficult to read patches > and makes sense only if each subsystem maintainer will take the patches > (separately). If the patches are going through one tree, then better to > remove the TXT gradually. > > So the question - who is going to take each of the patches? I can take the series through IMX tree if that makes the most sense. Shawn
On 05/07/2022 02:39, Shawn Guo wrote: > On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 07:51:06PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 29/06/2022 18:44, Viorel Suman (OSS) wrote: >>> From: Viorel Suman <viorel.suman@nxp.com> >>> >>> Changes since v5: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220616164303.790379-1-viorel.suman@nxp.com/ >>> * Updated according to Krzysztof Kozlowski comments >>> >> >> My comment a about removal of each part of TXT bindings in each patch, >> was not addressed. Your approach makes it more difficult to read patches >> and makes sense only if each subsystem maintainer will take the patches >> (separately). If the patches are going through one tree, then better to >> remove the TXT gradually. >> >> So the question - who is going to take each of the patches? > > I can take the series through IMX tree if that makes the most sense. Sounds fine to me. Then however each piece of TXT file should be removed in each commit doing that piece conversion. Best regards, Krzysztof
On 22-07-05 09:28:24, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 05/07/2022 02:39, Shawn Guo wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 07:51:06PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >> On 29/06/2022 18:44, Viorel Suman (OSS) wrote: > >>> From: Viorel Suman <viorel.suman@nxp.com> > >>> > >>> Changes since v5: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220616164303.790379-1-viorel.suman@nxp.com/ > >>> * Updated according to Krzysztof Kozlowski comments > >>> > >> > >> My comment a about removal of each part of TXT bindings in each patch, > >> was not addressed. Your approach makes it more difficult to read patches > >> and makes sense only if each subsystem maintainer will take the patches > >> (separately). If the patches are going through one tree, then better to > >> remove the TXT gradually. > >> > >> So the question - who is going to take each of the patches? > > > > I can take the series through IMX tree if that makes the most sense. > > Sounds fine to me. Then however each piece of TXT file should be removed > in each commit doing that piece conversion. > > Best regards, > Krzysztof Just sent v7 which removes TXT in each commit which does the conversion. Regards, Viorel
From: Viorel Suman <viorel.suman@nxp.com> Changes since v5: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220616164303.790379-1-viorel.suman@nxp.com/ * Updated according to Krzysztof Kozlowski comments Changes since v4: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220615105834.743045-1-viorel.suman@nxp.com/ * Missing SoB added Changes since v3: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220609143423.2839186-1-abel.vesa@nxp.com/ * Examples included * Included Abel's patches fixing thermal zone, keys and power controller names. Abel Vesa (13): dt-bindings: clk: imx: Add fsl,scu-clk yaml file dt-bindings: pinctrl: imx: Add fsl,scu-iomux yaml file dt-bindings: input: Add fsl,scu-key yaml file dt-bindings: nvmem: Add fsl,scu-ocotp yaml file dt-bindings: power: Add fsl,scu-pd yaml file dt-bindings: rtc: Add fsl,scu-rtc yaml file dt-bindings: thermal: Add fsl,scu-thermal yaml file dt-bindings: watchdog: Add fsl,scu-wdt yaml file dt-bindings: firmware: Add fsl,scu yaml file arm64: dts: freescale: imx8: Fix power controller name arm64: dts: freescale: imx8qxp: Add fallback compatible for clock controller arm64: dts: freescale: imx8qxp: Fix the keys node name dt-bindings: arm: freescale: Remove fsl,scu txt file Viorel Suman (1): arm64: dts: freescale: imx8qxp: Remove unnecessary clock related entries .../bindings/arm/freescale/fsl,scu.txt | 271 ------------------ .../bindings/clock/fsl,scu-clk.yaml | 43 +++ .../devicetree/bindings/firmware/fsl,scu.yaml | 160 +++++++++++ .../bindings/input/fsl,scu-key.yaml | 40 +++ .../bindings/nvmem/fsl,scu-ocotp.yaml | 57 ++++ .../bindings/pinctrl/fsl,scu-pinctrl.yaml | 68 +++++ .../devicetree/bindings/power/fsl,scu-pd.yaml | 41 +++ .../devicetree/bindings/rtc/fsl,scu-rtc.yaml | 31 ++ .../bindings/thermal/fsl,scu-thermal.yaml | 38 +++ .../bindings/watchdog/fsl,scu-wdt.yaml | 34 +++ arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8qm.dtsi | 2 +- arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8qxp.dtsi | 8 +- 12 files changed, 516 insertions(+), 277 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/freescale/fsl,scu.txt create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/fsl,scu-clk.yaml create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/fsl,scu.yaml create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/input/fsl,scu-key.yaml create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/fsl,scu-ocotp.yaml create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/fsl,scu-pinctrl.yaml create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/fsl,scu-pd.yaml create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/rtc/fsl,scu-rtc.yaml create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/thermal/fsl,scu-thermal.yaml create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog/fsl,scu-wdt.yaml