On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 11:42 PM, Han Xu < xhnj...@gmail.com > wrote: > On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 1:53 AM, Yuan Yao <yao.y...@freescale.com> wrote: > > This patch set is used for add the fsl-quadspi support for ls1021a and > > ls1043a, so remove the patch: > > mtd: spi-nor: fsl-quadspi: extend support for some special requerment. > > Please use --cover-letter to generate cover letter. > > > > > This patch will be send with anther patch set for add QSPI support on > > LS2080A. > > > > All the new property are document in anther patch set which is already > > send to linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org and devicet...@vger.kernel.org. > > Here is the patch name: > > 0001-Documentation-fsl-quadspi-Add-fsl-ls2080a-dspi-compa.patch > > 0002-Documentation-fsl-quadspi-Add-fsl-ls2080a-qspi-compa.patch > > 0003-dts-ls2080a-update-the-DTS-for-QSPI-and-DSPI-support.patch > > 0004-Documentation-fsl-quadspi-Add-optional-properties.patch > > > > Any extra information you can find them on the patchwork: > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8078931/ > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8078951/ > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8079091/ > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8078941/ > > Please send all patches in one patch set, this is not acceptable. >
Thanks for your review. But those patches are dts binding patch. And will send to devicet...@vger.kernel.org and some corresponding maintainer. Those two patch sets will send to different mail-list and maintainers separately. So, maybe it's better to send the patch to the maintainer accordingly and thus I think can also reduce the workload of maintainer. How about your think? Thanks. Yuan Yao.
