On Fri, Jan 23, 2026 at 08:47:24AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

On 18/01/2026 09:03, Thierry Reding wrote:

quoted

Hi ARM SoC maintainers,

The following changes since commit 8f0b4cce4481fb22653697cced8d0d04027cb1e8:

  Linux 6.19-rc1 (2025-12-14 16:05:07 +1200)

are available in the Git repository at:

  git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tegra/linux.git tags/tegra-for-6.20-dt-bindings

for you to fetch changes up to b2788f6320722d6059f849f35a77eb082608c627:

  ASoC: dt-bindings: realtek,rt5640: Document port node (2026-01-17 01:58:18 +0100)

Thanks,
Thierry

----------------------------------------------------------------
dt-bindings: Changes for v6.20-rc1

This series updates various DT bindings for Tegra architecture,
primarily focusing on schema validation fixes and new feature
documentation for Tegra234 and Tegra264 SoCs. Key changes include
correcting realtek,rt5640 audio codec bindings (adding missing ports,
clocks, and jack-detect sources), converting Tegra20 NAND bindings to
YAML, and updating memory, DMA, and IOMMU definitions for Tegra264
(introducing CMDQV and DBB clock support). Additionally, it resolves
legacy warnings for Tegra30/132 display and VI interfaces.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Ashish Mhetre (1):
      dt-bindings: iommu: Add NVIDIA Tegra CMDQV support

Charan Pedumuru (1):
      dt-bindings: mtd: nvidia,tegra20-nand: convert to DT schema

This should go via MTD. I think Miquel is not ignoring bindings.

I think this was standalone and hadn't seen any response from MTD, so I
vacuumed it up like I usually do.

quoted

Jon Hunter (4):
      dt-bindings: tegra: pmc: Update aotag as an optional aperture

...

quoted

      ASoC: dt-bindings: realtek,rt5640: Document mclk
      ASoC: dt-bindings: realtek,rt5640: Update jack-detect
      ASoC: dt-bindings: realtek,rt5640: Document port node

No, Mark always promptly picks up bindings patches, so I do not
understand why these are here. These should go via subsystem maintainer.

There's no clear pattern amongst subsystem maintainers, and given that I
make a final pass towards the end of the -rc5 week, I will usually look
at what patches haven't been picked up yet and apply them, provided that
they have a Reviewed-by/Acked-by from a DT maintainer.

In this case I missed Mark's reply since it was posted to the cover
letter and therefore didn't show up in Patchwork (I don't know if newer
versions of patchwork track this somehow, the instance on ozlabs
certainly doesn't). I'll work on a way to better track this.

quoted

Svyatoslav Ryhel (2):
      dt-bindings: display: tegra: document Tegra132 MIPI calibration device
      dt-bindings: display: tegra: document Tegra30 VI and VIP

Thierry Reding (1):
      dt-bindings: memory: tegra: Document DBB clock for Tegra264

And this one was never publicly acknowledged that you applied it and
lead to ACTUAL warning/review comment from my side postponing your other
patch.

Sometimes I forget to send out acknowledgements. I haven't found a good
and reliable way to automate this.

If you took this patch for DTS, then it must be on the DTS branch BEFORE
the DTS uses it. There is explicit rule about this in writing bindings.
You even sent it like that, look:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/176856655186.139432.6919318227218814446.b4-ty@nvidia.com/ (local)
1/3: DT binding
2/3: driver
3/3: DTS

so why a correct posting you would disorganize and break the
bisectability rule by applying binding separate?

As I explained earlier, I usually do exactly that, except that I keep
the branch separate and pull the dt-bindings branch into the DTS branch
as a dependency. I might have missed the dependency this time.

quoted

sheetal (1):
      dt-bindings: dma: Update ADMA bindings for tegra264

Vinod also picks up such bindings. If this is for DTS then should be in
DTS branch.

Same as for the MTD patch, there were no related DTS or driver changes,
and there was no message that this was applied, so I picked it up while
I was going over the list of pending patches.

Thierry