On 10/11/2017 03:26 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote:

Hi,

Alexandre Torgue [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Hi

On 10/11/2017 01:50 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote:

quoted

Hi,

Alexandre Torgue [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Hi Felip

On 10/11/2017 12:04 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote:

quoted

Hi,

Amelie Delaunay [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

The STM32F7 MCU family embeds two DWC2 USB OTG cores. One core is USB
OTG FS and the other is USB OTG HS. The USB FS core only works with its
internal phy whilst the USB HS core can work in HS with external ULPI phy
or in FS/LS with the on-chip FS phy.

Amelie Delaunay (7):
     dt-bindings: usb: Document the STM32F7 DWC2 USB OTG HS core binding
     usb: dwc2: add support for STM32F7 USB OTG HS
     ARM: dts: stm32: Add USB HS support for STM32F746 MCU

I have applied these three patches. Should I take the rest? They seems
like they could go upstream through the ARM maintainers.

I will take other DT patches in my PR.

Concerning "ARM: dts: stm32: Add USB HS support for STM32F746 MCU" patch
I prefer also to take it. This patch adds some pinctrl groups but stm32
pinctrl bindings will change in my next PR (we will use a macro to
define pins instead of using defined values). So if you push the DT
patch through your pull request there will be a merge issue.
It is possible that I take also this one ?

In that case, it's best if you take them all :-) Here's my Ack:

Acked-by: Felipe Balbi <redacted>

I'll drop them from my tree now

Ok perfect, I will take DT patches (3 to 7) and I let you take patch 1&2
in your tree.

Well, I have dropped them from my tree. Please two 1-7 through yours.

Hum, ok for this patchset but IMO it is better (next time) that you take 
driver pacthes in your tree and I take only DT patches in mine.
No ?

Regards
Alex