On 2021/01/21 17:25, Linus Walleij wrote:

On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 1:15 AM Damien Le Moal [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On 2021/01/21 3:21, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:

quoted

On Mon, 18 Jan 2021 05:33:05 PST (-0800), linus.walleij@linaro.org wrote:

quoted

Hi Damien,

this looks all right to me.
Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <redacted>

Shall I apply just this one patch to the pinctrl tree?

That's fine with me.  The DT bindings are in riscv/for-next, maybe it's best to
take those as well and I'll drop them?  I don't generally like to drop stuff
from for-next, but that's probably better than having everything all mixed up.

https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/riscv/linux.git/commit/?h=for-next&id=ed3137edb31b86702511e7ad12b4abe8686b6805

quoted

I think the line that touches arch/*/Kconfig should be dropped
then, that better go to the SoC tree.

I'm OK with you taking them along with my Ack, but if you don't want to that's
fine.  Just LMK

Acked-by: Palmer Dabbelt <redacted>

Linus,

Please let me know which way you want to proceed. If you want to take the patch,
I will resend without the Kconfig change and move that change to another patch.

It's fine to proceed as is, since Palmer already applied the bindings to
his tree, just apply the pinctrl driver there as well. I don't see any
risk of collisions in the tree.

Sounds good. Thanks !

Yours,
Linus Walleij

-- 
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research