RE: linux-next: manual merge of the gpio-brgl tree with the arm-soc tree

Hi all,

-----Original Message-----
From: Arnd Bergmann [mailto:arnd@kernel.org]
Sent: Tuesday, February 9, 2021 8:36 PM
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <redacted>; Bartosz Golaszewski <redacted>; Olof Johansson <redacted>;
Arnd Bergmann [off-list ref]; ARM [off-list ref]; Bartosz Golaszewski
[off-list ref]; Linux Kernel Mailing List [off-list ref]; Linux Next Mailing List
[off-list ref]; iwamatsu nobuhiro(岩松 信洋 □ＳＷＣ◯ＡＣＴ) [off-list ref]
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the gpio-brgl tree with the arm-soc tree

On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 11:01 AM Geert Uytterhoeven [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 7:05 AM Stephen Rothwell [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

quoted

diff --cc arch/arm64/boot/dts/toshiba/tmpv7708-rm-mbrc.dts
index 37da418393e0,950010a290f0..000000000000

--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/toshiba/tmpv7708-rm-mbrc.dts
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/toshiba/tmpv7708-rm-mbrc.dts

@@@ -42,7 -42,6 +42,11 @@@
        clock-names = "apb_pclk";
  };

 +&wdt {
 +      status = "okay";
 +      clocks = <&wdt_clk>;
 +};
++
+ &gpio {
+       status = "okay";
+ };

Probably some sort order should be taken into account (gpio before uart0),
also avoidng the conflict?

We normally do this by asking everyone to send the dts changes for
inclusion through the soc tree rather than the subsystem that contains
the driver. Why is this one in the gpio-brgl tree?

Perhaps this is Bartosz's mistake.
Linus has commented that gpio ml is captured via the soc tree.
  https://lore.kernel.org/linux-gpio/CACRpkdb--GSy-0vnAFS9Pik4TjrNRTrYeZr2RBZD6SFM8zotyQ@mail.gmail.com/ (local)

Bartosz, could you remove commit " arm: dts: visconti: Add DT support for Toshiba Visconti5 GPIO driver" from
your tree?

Best regards,
  Nobuhiro