Hi Hans, The dependence on [1] has been merged in 4.10, but [2] has not.Do you have any idea about this patch series? Should we wait for [2] or we could merge the source code and dt-binding first?
Best Regards, Rick On Wed, 2016-11-23 at 17:43 +0800, Rick Chang wrote: > On Wed, 2016-11-23 at 09:54 +0800, Rick Chang wrote: > > Hi Hans, > > > > On Tue, 2016-11-22 at 13:43 +0100, Hans Verkuil wrote: > > > On 22/11/16 04:21, Rick Chang wrote: > > > > Hi Hans, > > > > > > > > On Mon, 2016-11-21 at 15:51 +0100, Hans Verkuil wrote: > > > >> On 17/11/16 04:38, Rick Chang wrote: > > > >>> Signed-off-by: Rick Chang <rick.ch...@mediatek.com> > > > >>> Signed-off-by: Minghsiu Tsai <minghsiu.t...@mediatek.com> > > > >>> --- > > > >>> This patch depends on: > > > >>> CCF "Add clock support for Mediatek MT2701"[1] > > > >>> iommu and smi "Add the dtsi node of iommu and smi for mt2701"[2] > > > >>> > > > >>> [1] > > > >>> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mediatek/2016-October/007271.html > > > >>> [2] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9164013/ > > > >> > > > >> I assume that 1 & 2 will appear in 4.10? So this patch needs to go in > > > >> after the > > > >> other two are merged in 4.10? > > > >> > > > >> Regards, > > > >> > > > >> Hans > > > > > > > > [1] will appear in 4.10, but [2] will appear latter than 4.10.So this > > > > patch needs to go in after [1] & [2] will be merged in 4.11. > > > > > > So what should I do? Merge the driver for 4.11 and wait with this patch > > > until [2] is merged in 4.11? Does that sound reasonable? > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Hans > > > > What do you think about this? You merge the driver first and I send this > > patch again after [1] & [2] is merged. > > BTW, to prevent merging conflict, the dtsi should be merged by mediatek > SoC maintainer, Matthias.I think we can only take care on the driver > part at this moment. >
