>On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 01:22:10PM +0530, Rayagonda Kokatanur wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 11:29 AM Priyanka Jain (OSS)
>> wrote:
..
>> > Tom,
>> >
>> > I agree that bindings patch is essential for device-tree changes.
>> > But merging this patch will break Layerscape Platforms.
>> > We
om
> >Cc: Priyanka Jain
> >Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/1] Revert "arm64: Layerscape: Survive LPI one-way reset
> >workaround"
> >
> >+ author of gic_lpi_syscon driver
> >
> >Hi Rayagonda,
> >
> >Please add the binding for gic_lpi_syscon driver.
&
tember 10, 2021 12:13 PM
> > >To: Tom Rini ; u-boot@lists.denx.de;
> > >rayagonda.kokata...@broadcom.com
> > >Cc: Priyanka Jain
> > >Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/1] Revert "arm64: Layerscape: Survive LPI one-way
> > >reset
> > >workaround"
> &g
>-Original Message-
>From: U-Boot On Behalf Of Z.Q. Hou
>Sent: Friday, September 10, 2021 12:13 PM
>To: Tom Rini ; u-boot@lists.denx.de;
>rayagonda.kokata...@broadcom.com
>Cc: Priyanka Jain
>Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/1] Revert "arm64: Layerscape: Survive LPI
CH 1/1] Revert "arm64: Layerscape: Survive LPI one-way reset
> workaround"
>
> Ad-hoc bindings that are not part of the upstream device tree / bindings are
> not allowed in-tree. Only bindings that are in-progress with upstream and
> then re-synced
Ad-hoc bindings that are not part of the upstream device tree / bindings
are not allowed in-tree. Only bindings that are in-progress with
upstream and then re-synced once agreed upon are.
This reverts commit af288cb291da3abef6be0875527729296f7de7a0.
Cc: Hou Zhiqiang
Cc: Priyanka Jain
6 matches
Mail list logo
