Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] soc/fsl/qe: cleanups and new DT binding
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 6:17 AM Rasmus Villemoes wrote: > > This small series consists of some small cleanups and simplifications > of the QUICC engine driver, and introduces a new DT binding that makes > it much easier to support other variants of the QUICC engine IP block > that appears in the wild: There's no reason to expect in general that > the number of valid SNUMs uniquely determines the set of such, so it's > better to simply let the device tree specify the values (and, > implicitly via the array length, also the count). > > Which tree should this go through? > > v3: > - Move example from commit log into binding document (adapting to > MPC8360 which the existing example pertains to). > - Add more review tags. > - Fix minor style issue. > > v2: > - Address comments from Christophe Leroy > - Add his Reviewed-by to 1/6 and 3/6 > - Split DT binding update to separate patch as per > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.txt > > Rasmus Villemoes (6): > soc/fsl/qe: qe.c: drop useless static qualifier > soc/fsl/qe: qe.c: reduce static memory footprint by 1.7K > soc/fsl/qe: qe.c: introduce qe_get_device_node helper > dt-bindings: soc/fsl: qe: document new fsl,qe-snums binding > soc/fsl/qe: qe.c: support fsl,qe-snums property > soc/fsl/qe: qe.c: fold qe_get_num_of_snums into qe_snums_init Series applied to soc/fsl for-next. Thanks! Regards, Leo > > .../devicetree/bindings/soc/fsl/cpm_qe/qe.txt | 13 +- > drivers/soc/fsl/qe/qe.c | 163 +++--- > 2 files changed, 77 insertions(+), 99 deletions(-) > > -- > 2.20.1 >
Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] soc/fsl/qe: cleanups and new DT binding
On 13/05/2019 13.14, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: > This small series consists of some small cleanups and simplifications > of the QUICC engine driver, and introduces a new DT binding that makes > it much easier to support other variants of the QUICC engine IP block > that appears in the wild: There's no reason to expect in general that > the number of valid SNUMs uniquely determines the set of such, so it's > better to simply let the device tree specify the values (and, > implicitly via the array length, also the count). > > Which tree should this go through? Ping? These patches should be ready to go in, but I don't know who is supposed to pick them up. Thanks, Rasmus
RE: [PATCH v3 0/6] soc/fsl/qe: cleanups and new DT binding
> -Original Message- > From: Rasmus Villemoes > Sent: Monday, June 3, 2019 2:54 PM > To: devicet...@vger.kernel.org; Qiang Zhao ; Leo Li > > Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org; linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org; > linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org; Rob Herring ; Scott > Wood ; Christophe Leroy ; > Mark Rutland ; jo...@infinera.com > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] soc/fsl/qe: cleanups and new DT binding > > On 13/05/2019 13.14, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: > > This small series consists of some small cleanups and simplifications > > of the QUICC engine driver, and introduces a new DT binding that makes > > it much easier to support other variants of the QUICC engine IP block > > that appears in the wild: There's no reason to expect in general that > > the number of valid SNUMs uniquely determines the set of such, so it's > > better to simply let the device tree specify the values (and, > > implicitly via the array length, also the count). > > > > Which tree should this go through? > > Ping? These patches should be ready to go in, but I don't know who is > supposed to pick them up. I can pick them up through the soc/fsl tree. Regards, Leo
