On Tue, 16 Sep 2025, Corey Minyard wrote: > On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 06:51:25PM +0800, Binbin Zhou wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 6:14 PM Lee Jones <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, 16 Sep 2025, Binbin Zhou wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Lee: > > > > > > > > Thanks for your reply. > > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 4:40 PM Lee Jones <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 12 Sep 2025, Binbin Zhou wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Lee: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 10:33 PM Lee Jones <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 04 Sep 2025 20:35:04 +0800, Binbin Zhou wrote: > > > > > > > > This patchset introduces the Loongson-2K BMC. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is a PCIe device present on servers similar to the > > > > > > > > Loongson-3 CPUs. > > > > > > > > And it is a multifunctional device (MFD), such as display as a > > > > > > > > sub-function > > > > > > > > of it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For IPMI, according to the existing design, we use software > > > > > > > > simulation to > > > > > > > > implement the KCS interface registers: > > > > > > > > Stauts/Command/Data_Out/Data_In. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Applied, thanks! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1/3] mfd: ls2kbmc: Introduce Loongson-2K BMC core driver > > > > > > > commit: 67c2639e1fc1a07b45d216af659c0dd92a370c68 > > > > > > > [2/3] mfd: ls2kbmc: Add Loongson-2K BMC reset function support > > > > > > > commit: 2364ccc827e44064e9763f2ae2d1dcc5f945fdf3 > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for acknowledging my patchset. > > > > > > > > > > > > I can't confirm why you didn't apply the IPMI patch, but this > > > > > > appears > > > > > > to break the patchset's integrity, potentially causing missing > > > > > > Kconfig > > > > > > dependencies (IPMI_LS2K select MFD_LS2K_BMC_CORE). > > > > > > > > > > Pretty sure this doesn't break anything. > > > > > > > > > > What build errors do you see as a result? > > > > > > > > > > > Additionally, as Corey previously explained[1], this patch can be > > > > > > applied through your side. > > > > > > > > > > > > [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/ > > > > > > > > > > We only apply cross-subsystem patch-sets to a single tree if there are > > > > > good reasons to do so. In this instance, I can't see any reason why > > > > > the > > > > > IPMI driver cannot go in via it's own repo. > > > > > > > > However, there still seems to be a text dependency issue. The IPMI > > > > patch modifies the MAINTAINERS, which depends on the first patch. > > > > If the entire series of patches cannot be merged together, does this > > > > mean the IPMI patch can only be merged after the MFD patch has been > > > > merged into the mainline? > > > > > > No, not at all. So long as all patches come together during the > > > merge-window, there is no issue. > > > > OK, I see, thanks. > > > > Hi Corey: > > > > What do you think about it? > > I thought my ack would be sufficient, but I've pulled this into my tree. > I can't apply the MAINTAINERS portion of this, but that can go in > later; you can send me a patch for that after the next kernel release. > > I'll make a note to Linus that this depends on the MFD changes.
Feel free to separate that from that patch and I'll happily apply it. -- Lee Jones [李琼斯] _______________________________________________ Openipmi-developer mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openipmi-developer
