Example DTS should not have 'status' property.
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>
---
.../devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6125-mdss.yaml | 6 ------
1 file changed, 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6125-mdss.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6125-mdss.yaml
index 2525482424cb..479c82e6a0d8 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6125-mdss.yaml
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6125-mdss.yaml
@@ -95,8 +95,6 @@ examples:
#size-cells = <1>;
ranges;
- status = "disabled";
-
display-controller@5e01000 {
compatible = "qcom,sm6125-dpu";
reg = <0x05e01000 0x83208>,
@@ -170,8 +168,6 @@ examples:
#address-cells = <1>;
#size-cells = <0>;
- status = "disabled";
-
ports {
#address-cells = <1>;
#size-cells = <0>;
@@ -210,8 +206,6 @@ examples:
required-opps = <&rpmpd_opp_svs>;
power-domains = <&rpmpd SM6125_VDDMX>;
-
- status = "disabled";
};
};
...
--
2.34.1
On 2023-07-25 12:16:10, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> Example DTS should not have 'status' property.
>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>
> ---
> .../devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6125-mdss.yaml | 6 ------
This is not needed: it has already been corrected in v3 and v4 of the
respective series (among other changes) and the patches were only picked
to a preliminary (draft) pull to get an overview of the outstanding work
for this subsystem. That branch happens to be included in regular -next
releases though.
6.6 drm/msm display pull: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/msm/-/merge_requests/69
v3: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/[email protected]/
v4: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/[email protected]/
- Marijn
> 1 file changed, 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6125-mdss.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6125-mdss.yaml
> index 2525482424cb..479c82e6a0d8 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6125-mdss.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6125-mdss.yaml
> @@ -95,8 +95,6 @@ examples:
> #size-cells = <1>;
> ranges;
>
> - status = "disabled";
> -
> display-controller@5e01000 {
> compatible = "qcom,sm6125-dpu";
> reg = <0x05e01000 0x83208>,
> @@ -170,8 +168,6 @@ examples:
> #address-cells = <1>;
> #size-cells = <0>;
>
> - status = "disabled";
> -
> ports {
> #address-cells = <1>;
> #size-cells = <0>;
> @@ -210,8 +206,6 @@ examples:
>
> required-opps = <&rpmpd_opp_svs>;
> power-domains = <&rpmpd SM6125_VDDMX>;
> -
> - status = "disabled";
> };
> };
> ...
> --
> 2.34.1
>
On 26/07/2023 09:27, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 25/07/2023 13:46, Marijn Suijten wrote:
>> On 2023-07-25 12:16:10, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> Example DTS should not have 'status' property.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>> .../devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6125-mdss.yaml | 6 ------
>>
>> This is not needed: it has already been corrected in v3 and v4 of the
>> respective series (among other changes) and the patches were only picked
>> to a preliminary (draft) pull to get an overview of the outstanding work
>> for this subsystem. That branch happens to be included in regular -next
>> releases though.
>>
>> 6.6 drm/msm display pull: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/msm/-/merge_requests/69
>> v3: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/[email protected]/
>> v4: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/[email protected]/
>
> What do you mean? The old code (one I am fixing) is in current next...
>
> If this was fixed, why next gets some outdated branches of drm next?
> Each maintainers next tree is supposed to be fed into the next, without
> delays.
>
Ah, I think I understood - some work in progress was applied to
work-in-progress branch of drm/msm and this somehow got pushed to
linux-next? How anyone is supposed to work on next branches if they are
outdated or have stuff known to be incomplete?
Best regards,
Krzysztof
On 25/07/2023 13:46, Marijn Suijten wrote:
> On 2023-07-25 12:16:10, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> Example DTS should not have 'status' property.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> .../devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6125-mdss.yaml | 6 ------
>
> This is not needed: it has already been corrected in v3 and v4 of the
> respective series (among other changes) and the patches were only picked
> to a preliminary (draft) pull to get an overview of the outstanding work
> for this subsystem. That branch happens to be included in regular -next
> releases though.
>
> 6.6 drm/msm display pull: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/msm/-/merge_requests/69
> v3: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/[email protected]/
> v4: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/[email protected]/
What do you mean? The old code (one I am fixing) is in current next...
If this was fixed, why next gets some outdated branches of drm next?
Each maintainers next tree is supposed to be fed into the next, without
delays.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
On 26/07/2023 10:31, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 26/07/2023 09:27, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 25/07/2023 13:46, Marijn Suijten wrote:
>>> On 2023-07-25 12:16:10, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> Example DTS should not have 'status' property.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>
>>>> ---
>>>> .../devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6125-mdss.yaml | 6 ------
>>>
>>> This is not needed: it has already been corrected in v3 and v4 of the
>>> respective series (among other changes) and the patches were only picked
>>> to a preliminary (draft) pull to get an overview of the outstanding work
>>> for this subsystem. That branch happens to be included in regular -next
>>> releases though.
>>>
>>> 6.6 drm/msm display pull: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/msm/-/merge_requests/69
>>> v3: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/[email protected]/
>>> v4: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/[email protected]/
>>
>> What do you mean? The old code (one I am fixing) is in current next...
>>
>> If this was fixed, why next gets some outdated branches of drm next?
>> Each maintainers next tree is supposed to be fed into the next, without
>> delays.
>>
>
> Ah, I think I understood - some work in progress was applied to
> work-in-progress branch of drm/msm and this somehow got pushed to
> linux-next? How anyone is supposed to work on next branches if they are
> outdated or have stuff known to be incomplete?
The drm/msm & bindings parts were considered final, but then I failed to
send 'applied' series for some reason. And then it was natural for
Marijn to send an updated revision.
--
With best wishes
Dmitry
On 2023-07-26 10:42:24, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On 26/07/2023 10:31, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On 26/07/2023 09:27, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >> On 25/07/2023 13:46, Marijn Suijten wrote:
> >>> On 2023-07-25 12:16:10, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >>>> Example DTS should not have 'status' property.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> .../devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6125-mdss.yaml | 6 ------
> >>>
> >>> This is not needed: it has already been corrected in v3 and v4 of the
> >>> respective series (among other changes) and the patches were only picked
> >>> to a preliminary (draft) pull to get an overview of the outstanding work
> >>> for this subsystem. That branch happens to be included in regular -next
> >>> releases though.
> >>>
> >>> 6.6 drm/msm display pull: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/msm/-/merge_requests/69
> >>> v3: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/[email protected]/
> >>> v4: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/[email protected]/
> >>
> >> What do you mean? The old code (one I am fixing) is in current next...
> >>
> >> If this was fixed, why next gets some outdated branches of drm next?
> >> Each maintainers next tree is supposed to be fed into the next, without
> >> delays.
> >>
> >
> > Ah, I think I understood - some work in progress was applied to
> > work-in-progress branch of drm/msm and this somehow got pushed to
> > linux-next? How anyone is supposed to work on next branches if they are
> > outdated or have stuff known to be incomplete?
>
> The drm/msm & bindings parts were considered final, but then I failed to
> send 'applied' series for some reason. And then it was natural for
> Marijn to send an updated revision.
There were comments on some of the patches that would have an effect on
the binding parts (including the examples).
- Marijn