@@ -16,6 +16,7 @@ Required properties: - "renesas,etheravb-rcar-gen2" as a fallback for the above R-Car Gen2 and RZ/G1 devices.+ - "renesas,etheravb-r8a774a1" for the R8A774A1 SoC. - "renesas,etheravb-r8a7795" for the R8A7795 SoC. - "renesas,etheravb-r8a7796" for the R8A7796 SoC. - "renesas,etheravb-r8a77965" for the R8A77965 SoC.
@@ -24,7 +25,7 @@ Required properties: - "renesas,etheravb-r8a77990" for the R8A77990 SoC. - "renesas,etheravb-r8a77995" for the R8A77995 SoC. - "renesas,etheravb-rcar-gen3" as a fallback for the above- R-Car Gen3 devices.+ R-Car Gen3 and RZ/G2 devices. When compatible with the generic version, nodes must list the SoC-specific version corresponding to the platform first followed by
Renesas Electronics Europe Ltd, Dukes Meadow, Millboard Road, Bourne End, Buckinghamshire, SL8 5FH, UK. Registered in England & Wales under Registered No. 04586709.
I'm asking something different. I'm asking which subsystem tree, and
which maintainer, should apply this patch.
I think this is appropriate for net-next, and as far as I can tell previous patches have either been applied by you (mostly) or Rob Herring.
Maybe I should have put "[PATCH net-next]" in the Subject like the following?
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10314835/
Thanks,
Fab
Renesas Electronics Europe Ltd, Dukes Meadow, Millboard Road, Bourne End, Buckinghamshire, SL8 5FH, UK. Registered in England & Wales under Registered No. 04586709.