On Mon, 9 Aug 2021 at 13:17, A, Rashmi [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

-----Original Message-----
From: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>
Sent: Monday, August 9, 2021 2:12 PM
To: A, Rashmi <redacted>
Cc: Ulf Hansson <redacted>; Michal Simek
[off-list ref]; linux-mmc [off-list ref]; Linux
ARM [off-list ref]; Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-
kernel@vger.kernel.org>; Kishon [off-list ref]; Andy Shevchenko
[off-list ref]; linux-phy@lists.infradead.org; Mark
Gross [off-list ref]; kris.pan@linux.intel.com; Zhou, Furong
[off-list ref]; Sangannavar, Mallikarjunappa
[off-list ref]; Hunter, Adrian
[off-list ref]; Vaidya, Mahesh R
[off-list ref]; Srikandan, Nandhini
[off-list ref]; Demakkanavar, Kenchappa
[off-list ref]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] mmc: sdhci-of-arasan: Add intel Thunder Bay SOC
support to the arasan eMMC driver

On 09-08-21, 05:16, A, Rashmi wrote:

quoted

quoted

Rashmi, is it safe to apply this separately from the phy driver/dt changes?
Then I can queue this via my mmc tree, if you like.

No, the phy driver/dt changes must go together with "mmc: sdhci-of-

arasan: Add intel Thunder Bay SOC support to the arasan eMMC driver"
patch.

Why is that?

What could happen, emmc driver will complain about phy not found and bail
right?

This is right, but ideally both mmc:phy and mmc: sdhci-of-arasan driver code changes should go together

If patches are well written and can be standalone, we (maintainers)
ideally prefer to queue things on a per subsystem basis, because it's
just easier.

That said, I also noticed that a new compatible string was added,
"intel,thunderbay-sdhci-5.1". This needs to be documented in
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/arasan,sdhci.yaml, in a separate
patch, preceding $subject patch.

Kind regards
Uffe