-----Original Message-----
From: Yinbo Zhu [mailto:yinbo.zhu@nxp.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2018 10:35 PM
To: Yinbo Zhu <redacted>; Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>;
Mark Rutland [off-list ref]; Catalin Marinas )
[off-list ref]; Will Deacon ) [off-list ref];
Lorenzo Pieralisi ) [off-list ref]; Leo Li <leoyang.li@nxp.c=

om>

Cc: Xiaobo Xie <redacted>; Ran Wang <redacted>;
Daniel Lezcano [off-list ref]; Thomas Gleixner
[off-list ref]; Shawn Guo [off-list ref]; Madalin-cristian
Bucur [off-list ref]; Z.q. Hou [off-list ref]; Jerry
Huang [off-list ref]; M.h. Lian [off-list ref];
Qiang Zhao [off-list ref]; Fabio Estevam
[off-list ref]; Jiaheng Fan [off-list ref]; Po Liu
[off-list ref]; Nipun Gupta [off-list ref]; Horia Geant=E3
[off-list ref]; Priyanka Jain [off-list ref]; Sumit
Garg [off-list ref]; costi [off-list ref];
Bogdan Purcareata [off-list ref]; Meng Yi
[off-list ref]; Wang Dongsheng [off-list ref]; open
list:CLOCKSOURCE, CLOCKEVENT DRIVERS [off-list ref];
open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS
[off-list ref]; linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; open
list:FREESCALE SOC DRIVERS [off-list ref]; Andy Tang
[off-list ref]; Ying Zhang [off-list ref]
Subject: [PATCH 3/9] soc: fsl: set rcpm bit for FTM
=20
From: Zhang Ying-22455 <redacted>
=20
Set RCPM for FTM when using FTM as wakeup source. Because the RCPM
module of each platform has different big-end and little-end mode, there
need to set RCPM depending on the platform.
=20
Signed-off-by: Zhang Ying-22455 <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Yinbo Zhu <redacted>
---
 .../devicetree/bindings/timer/fsl,ftm-timer.txt    |    7 ++
 drivers/soc/fsl/layerscape/ftm_alarm.c             |   92 ++++++++++++++=

++++-

Hi Yingbo,

This is a change that breaks backward compatibility and not acceptable.

+ Possible compatibles for ARM:
+     "fsl,ls1012a-ftm"
+     "fsl,ls1021a-ftm"
+     "fsl,ls1043a-ftm"
+     "fsl,ls1046a-ftm"
+     "fsl,ls1088a-ftm"
+     "fsl,ls208xa-ftm"
 - reg : Specifies base physical address and size of the register sets fo=

r the

There is no such file in the mainline kernel.  So it looks like the patch s=
et is based on some internal git repo instead of the upstream Linux kernel.=
  This kind of patches shouldn't be sent to the upstream mailing list for r=
eview.

Regards,
Leo