Re: [PATCH v4 00/11] An effort to bring DT bindings compliance within U-Boot

2024-01-31 Thread Tom Rini
On Wed, Jan 31, 2024 at 06:26:54PM +0530, Sumit Garg wrote: [snip] > So I did a demo experiment for this here [1] where cherry picking DT > fixes into subtree just worked fine with the next uprev. Steps > followed: > > $ cd / > $ git remote add dt-rebasing >

Re: [PATCH v4 00/11] An effort to bring DT bindings compliance within U-Boot

2024-01-31 Thread Sumit Garg
On Fri, 26 Jan 2024 at 12:35, Michal Simek wrote: > > > On 1/26/24 03:10, Marek Vasut wrote: > > On 1/26/24 00:19, Tom Rini wrote: > >> On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 05:38:23PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote: > >>> On 1/25/24 16:04, Tom Rini wrote: > On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 12:54:22PM +0530, Sumit Garg

Re: [PATCH v4 00/11] An effort to bring DT bindings compliance within U-Boot

2024-01-25 Thread Michal Simek
On 1/26/24 03:10, Marek Vasut wrote: On 1/26/24 00:19, Tom Rini wrote: On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 05:38:23PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote: On 1/25/24 16:04, Tom Rini wrote: On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 12:54:22PM +0530, Sumit Garg wrote: [snip] But at this point we have to move away from

Re: [PATCH v4 00/11] An effort to bring DT bindings compliance within U-Boot

2024-01-25 Thread Marek Vasut
On 1/26/24 00:19, Tom Rini wrote: On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 05:38:23PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote: On 1/25/24 16:04, Tom Rini wrote: On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 12:54:22PM +0530, Sumit Garg wrote: [snip] But at this point we have to move away from apprehensions about DT ABI breakages and provide

Re: [PATCH v4 00/11] An effort to bring DT bindings compliance within U-Boot

2024-01-25 Thread Tom Rini
On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 05:38:23PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote: > On 1/25/24 16:04, Tom Rini wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 12:54:22PM +0530, Sumit Garg wrote: > > > > [snip] > > > But at this point we have to move away from apprehensions about DT ABI > > > breakages and provide real examples of

Re: [PATCH v4 00/11] An effort to bring DT bindings compliance within U-Boot

2024-01-25 Thread Marek Vasut
On 1/25/24 16:04, Tom Rini wrote: On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 12:54:22PM +0530, Sumit Garg wrote: [snip] But at this point we have to move away from apprehensions about DT ABI breakages and provide real examples of the DT ABI breakages in the past. Are you aware of any DT ABI breaking change

Re: [PATCH v4 00/11] An effort to bring DT bindings compliance within U-Boot

2024-01-25 Thread Tom Rini
On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 12:54:22PM +0530, Sumit Garg wrote: [snip] > But at this point we have to move away from apprehensions about DT ABI > breakages and provide real examples of the DT ABI breakages in the > past. Are you aware of any DT ABI breaking change backported to Linux > stable

Re: [PATCH v4 00/11] An effort to bring DT bindings compliance within U-Boot

2024-01-24 Thread Sumit Garg
On Thu, 25 Jan 2024 at 07:36, Marek Vasut wrote: > > On 1/24/24 09:16, Sumit Garg wrote: > > Hi, > > How do you propose to handle fixes to DTs which are applied to > linux-stable releases ? For example, if Linux 6.6(.0) ships a DT which > has some defect that is fixed in 6.6.1, how

Re: [PATCH v4 00/11] An effort to bring DT bindings compliance within U-Boot

2024-01-24 Thread Marek Vasut
On 1/24/24 09:16, Sumit Garg wrote: Hi, How do you propose to handle fixes to DTs which are applied to linux-stable releases ? For example, if Linux 6.6(.0) ships a DT which has some defect that is fixed in 6.6.1, how will that fix get into U-Boot DTs ? This fix would also be in the latest

Re: [PATCH v4 00/11] An effort to bring DT bindings compliance within U-Boot

2024-01-24 Thread Sumit Garg
Hi Rob, Andre, On Tue, 23 Jan 2024 at 22:12, Rob Herring wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 6:59 PM Andre Przywara wrote: > > > > On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 11:49:59 -0500 > > Tom Rini wrote: > > > > Hi Tom, > > > > > On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 11:45:15AM +, Andre Przywara wrote: > > > > On Wed, 10

Re: [PATCH v4 00/11] An effort to bring DT bindings compliance within U-Boot

2024-01-24 Thread Sumit Garg
Hi Marek, On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 at 05:47, Marek Vasut wrote: > > On 1/21/24 23:41, Caleb Connolly wrote: > > Hi, > > [...] > > >> How do you propose to handle fixes to DTs which are applied to > >> linux-stable releases ? For example, if Linux 6.6(.0) ships a DT which > >> has some defect that is

Re: [PATCH v4 00/11] An effort to bring DT bindings compliance within U-Boot

2024-01-23 Thread Sumit Garg
On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 at 05:31, Tom Rini wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 21, 2024 at 10:41:51PM +, Caleb Connolly wrote: > > > > > > On 21/01/2024 15:33, Marek Vasut wrote: > [snip] > > > Assume that there is some large breaking change in Linux 6.(n+1), > > > something which would be problematic for

Re: [PATCH v4 00/11] An effort to bring DT bindings compliance within U-Boot

2024-01-23 Thread Sumit Garg
Hi Nishanth, Apologies for the delayed response as I was on a long weekend vacation. On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 at 21:27, Nishanth Menon wrote: > > On 16:05-20240110, Sumit Garg wrote: > [...] > > Prerequisite > > > > > > This patch series requires devicetree-rebasing git repo to be added

Re: [PATCH v4 00/11] An effort to bring DT bindings compliance within U-Boot

2024-01-23 Thread Rob Herring
On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 6:59 PM Andre Przywara wrote: > > On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 11:49:59 -0500 > Tom Rini wrote: > > Hi Tom, > > > On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 11:45:15AM +, Andre Przywara wrote: > > > On Wed, 10 Jan 2024 16:05:36 +0530 > > > Sumit Garg wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I

Re: [PATCH v4 00/11] An effort to bring DT bindings compliance within U-Boot

2024-01-22 Thread Andre Przywara
On Mon, 22 Jan 2024 11:49:59 -0500 Tom Rini wrote: Hi Tom, > On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 11:45:15AM +, Andre Przywara wrote: > > On Wed, 10 Jan 2024 16:05:36 +0530 > > Sumit Garg wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I certainly welcome this more automatic synchronisation of the DTs, > > however have

Re: [PATCH v4 00/11] An effort to bring DT bindings compliance within U-Boot

2024-01-22 Thread Tom Rini
On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 11:45:15AM +, Andre Przywara wrote: > On Wed, 10 Jan 2024 16:05:36 +0530 > Sumit Garg wrote: > > Hi, > > I certainly welcome this more automatic synchronisation of the DTs, > however have one comment about the upcoming sync process: > > > ... > > However, Linux

Re: [PATCH v4 00/11] An effort to bring DT bindings compliance within U-Boot

2024-01-22 Thread Andre Przywara
On Wed, 10 Jan 2024 16:05:36 +0530 Sumit Garg wrote: Hi, I certainly welcome this more automatic synchronisation of the DTs, however have one comment about the upcoming sync process: > ... > However, Linux kernel DT maintainers proposed [2] for U-Boot to rather > use devicetree-rebasing repo

Re: [PATCH v4 00/11] An effort to bring DT bindings compliance within U-Boot

2024-01-21 Thread Marek Vasut
On 1/21/24 23:41, Caleb Connolly wrote: Hi, [...] How do you propose to handle fixes to DTs which are applied to linux-stable releases ? For example, if Linux 6.6(.0) ships a DT which has some defect that is fixed in 6.6.1, how will that fix get into U-Boot DTs ? This fix would also be in

Re: [PATCH v4 00/11] An effort to bring DT bindings compliance within U-Boot

2024-01-21 Thread Tom Rini
On Sun, Jan 21, 2024 at 10:41:51PM +, Caleb Connolly wrote: > > > On 21/01/2024 15:33, Marek Vasut wrote: [snip] > > Assume that there is some large breaking change in Linux 6.(n+1), > > something which would be problematic for specific U-Boot platform (e.g. > > i.MX) or would require a lot

Re: [PATCH v4 00/11] An effort to bring DT bindings compliance within U-Boot

2024-01-21 Thread Caleb Connolly
On 21/01/2024 15:33, Marek Vasut wrote: On 1/10/24 11:35, Sumit Garg wrote: Changes in v4: -- - Switched subtree to be imported as dts/upstream sub-directory rather    than devicetree-rebasing sub-directory to better suite U-Boot    directory structure. - Since we now have

Re: [PATCH v4 00/11] An effort to bring DT bindings compliance within U-Boot

2024-01-21 Thread Marek Vasut
On 1/10/24 11:35, Sumit Garg wrote: Changes in v4: -- - Switched subtree to be imported as dts/upstream sub-directory rather than devicetree-rebasing sub-directory to better suite U-Boot directory structure. - Since we now have v6.7-dts tag available now, so switch subtree to

Re: [PATCH v4 00/11] An effort to bring DT bindings compliance within U-Boot

2024-01-19 Thread Nishanth Menon
On 16:05-20240110, Sumit Garg wrote: [...] > Prerequisite > > > This patch series requires devicetree-rebasing git repo to be added as a > subtree to the main U-Boot repo via: > > $ git subtree add --prefix dts/upstream \ > >

[PATCH v4 00/11] An effort to bring DT bindings compliance within U-Boot

2024-01-10 Thread Sumit Garg
Changes in v4: -- - Switched subtree to be imported as dts/upstream sub-directory rather than devicetree-rebasing sub-directory to better suite U-Boot directory structure. - Since we now have v6.7-dts tag available now, so switch subtree to that from its beginning. - Patch #2: