| Message ID | 20230725101610.75122-1-krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | dt-bindings: display: msm: sm6125-mdss: drop unneeded status from examples | expand |
On 2023-07-25 12:16:10, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > Example DTS should not have 'status' property. > > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> > --- > .../devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6125-mdss.yaml | 6 ------ This is not needed: it has already been corrected in v3 and v4 of the respective series (among other changes) and the patches were only picked to a preliminary (draft) pull to get an overview of the outstanding work for this subsystem. That branch happens to be included in regular -next releases though. 6.6 drm/msm display pull: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/msm/-/merge_requests/69 v3: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20230718-sm6125-dpu-v3-0-6c5a56e99820@somainline.org/ v4: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20230723-sm6125-dpu-v4-0-a3f287dd6c07@somainline.org/ - Marijn > 1 file changed, 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6125-mdss.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6125-mdss.yaml > index 2525482424cb..479c82e6a0d8 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6125-mdss.yaml > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6125-mdss.yaml > @@ -95,8 +95,6 @@ examples: > #size-cells = <1>; > ranges; > > - status = "disabled"; > - > display-controller@5e01000 { > compatible = "qcom,sm6125-dpu"; > reg = <0x05e01000 0x83208>, > @@ -170,8 +168,6 @@ examples: > #address-cells = <1>; > #size-cells = <0>; > > - status = "disabled"; > - > ports { > #address-cells = <1>; > #size-cells = <0>; > @@ -210,8 +206,6 @@ examples: > > required-opps = <&rpmpd_opp_svs>; > power-domains = <&rpmpd SM6125_VDDMX>; > - > - status = "disabled"; > }; > }; > ... > -- > 2.34.1 >
On 25/07/2023 13:46, Marijn Suijten wrote: > On 2023-07-25 12:16:10, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> Example DTS should not have 'status' property. >> >> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> >> --- >> .../devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6125-mdss.yaml | 6 ------ > > This is not needed: it has already been corrected in v3 and v4 of the > respective series (among other changes) and the patches were only picked > to a preliminary (draft) pull to get an overview of the outstanding work > for this subsystem. That branch happens to be included in regular -next > releases though. > > 6.6 drm/msm display pull: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/msm/-/merge_requests/69 > v3: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20230718-sm6125-dpu-v3-0-6c5a56e99820@somainline.org/ > v4: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20230723-sm6125-dpu-v4-0-a3f287dd6c07@somainline.org/ What do you mean? The old code (one I am fixing) is in current next... If this was fixed, why next gets some outdated branches of drm next? Each maintainers next tree is supposed to be fed into the next, without delays. Best regards, Krzysztof
On 26/07/2023 09:27, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 25/07/2023 13:46, Marijn Suijten wrote: >> On 2023-07-25 12:16:10, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> Example DTS should not have 'status' property. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> >>> --- >>> .../devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6125-mdss.yaml | 6 ------ >> >> This is not needed: it has already been corrected in v3 and v4 of the >> respective series (among other changes) and the patches were only picked >> to a preliminary (draft) pull to get an overview of the outstanding work >> for this subsystem. That branch happens to be included in regular -next >> releases though. >> >> 6.6 drm/msm display pull: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/msm/-/merge_requests/69 >> v3: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20230718-sm6125-dpu-v3-0-6c5a56e99820@somainline.org/ >> v4: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20230723-sm6125-dpu-v4-0-a3f287dd6c07@somainline.org/ > > What do you mean? The old code (one I am fixing) is in current next... > > If this was fixed, why next gets some outdated branches of drm next? > Each maintainers next tree is supposed to be fed into the next, without > delays. > Ah, I think I understood - some work in progress was applied to work-in-progress branch of drm/msm and this somehow got pushed to linux-next? How anyone is supposed to work on next branches if they are outdated or have stuff known to be incomplete? Best regards, Krzysztof
On 26/07/2023 10:31, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 26/07/2023 09:27, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 25/07/2023 13:46, Marijn Suijten wrote: >>> On 2023-07-25 12:16:10, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> Example DTS should not have 'status' property. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> >>>> --- >>>> .../devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6125-mdss.yaml | 6 ------ >>> >>> This is not needed: it has already been corrected in v3 and v4 of the >>> respective series (among other changes) and the patches were only picked >>> to a preliminary (draft) pull to get an overview of the outstanding work >>> for this subsystem. That branch happens to be included in regular -next >>> releases though. >>> >>> 6.6 drm/msm display pull: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/msm/-/merge_requests/69 >>> v3: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20230718-sm6125-dpu-v3-0-6c5a56e99820@somainline.org/ >>> v4: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20230723-sm6125-dpu-v4-0-a3f287dd6c07@somainline.org/ >> >> What do you mean? The old code (one I am fixing) is in current next... >> >> If this was fixed, why next gets some outdated branches of drm next? >> Each maintainers next tree is supposed to be fed into the next, without >> delays. >> > > Ah, I think I understood - some work in progress was applied to > work-in-progress branch of drm/msm and this somehow got pushed to > linux-next? How anyone is supposed to work on next branches if they are > outdated or have stuff known to be incomplete? The drm/msm & bindings parts were considered final, but then I failed to send 'applied' series for some reason. And then it was natural for Marijn to send an updated revision.
On 2023-07-26 10:42:24, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > On 26/07/2023 10:31, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > On 26/07/2023 09:27, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >> On 25/07/2023 13:46, Marijn Suijten wrote: > >>> On 2023-07-25 12:16:10, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >>>> Example DTS should not have 'status' property. > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> > >>>> --- > >>>> .../devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6125-mdss.yaml | 6 ------ > >>> > >>> This is not needed: it has already been corrected in v3 and v4 of the > >>> respective series (among other changes) and the patches were only picked > >>> to a preliminary (draft) pull to get an overview of the outstanding work > >>> for this subsystem. That branch happens to be included in regular -next > >>> releases though. > >>> > >>> 6.6 drm/msm display pull: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/msm/-/merge_requests/69 > >>> v3: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20230718-sm6125-dpu-v3-0-6c5a56e99820@somainline.org/ > >>> v4: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20230723-sm6125-dpu-v4-0-a3f287dd6c07@somainline.org/ > >> > >> What do you mean? The old code (one I am fixing) is in current next... > >> > >> If this was fixed, why next gets some outdated branches of drm next? > >> Each maintainers next tree is supposed to be fed into the next, without > >> delays. > >> > > > > Ah, I think I understood - some work in progress was applied to > > work-in-progress branch of drm/msm and this somehow got pushed to > > linux-next? How anyone is supposed to work on next branches if they are > > outdated or have stuff known to be incomplete? > > The drm/msm & bindings parts were considered final, but then I failed to > send 'applied' series for some reason. And then it was natural for > Marijn to send an updated revision. There were comments on some of the patches that would have an effect on the binding parts (including the examples). - Marijn
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6125-mdss.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6125-mdss.yaml index 2525482424cb..479c82e6a0d8 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6125-mdss.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6125-mdss.yaml @@ -95,8 +95,6 @@ examples: #size-cells = <1>; ranges; - status = "disabled"; - display-controller@5e01000 { compatible = "qcom,sm6125-dpu"; reg = <0x05e01000 0x83208>, @@ -170,8 +168,6 @@ examples: #address-cells = <1>; #size-cells = <0>; - status = "disabled"; - ports { #address-cells = <1>; #size-cells = <0>; @@ -210,8 +206,6 @@ examples: required-opps = <&rpmpd_opp_svs>; power-domains = <&rpmpd SM6125_VDDMX>; - - status = "disabled"; }; }; ...
Example DTS should not have 'status' property. Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> --- .../devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6125-mdss.yaml | 6 ------ 1 file changed, 6 deletions(-)