On 16/11/2022 12:31, Abel Vesa wrote:
> Document the compatible for SM8550.
>
> Signed-off-by: Abel Vesa <[email protected]>
Why this is not part of other SoC patches? I just received many single
patches for this SM8550 topic. All these should be set of few series,
not 10 or more...
Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>
Best regards,
Krzysztof
On 22-11-16 12:43:26, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 16/11/2022 12:31, Abel Vesa wrote:
> > Document the compatible for SM8550.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Abel Vesa <[email protected]>
>
> Why this is not part of other SoC patches? I just received many single
> patches for this SM8550 topic. All these should be set of few series,
> not 10 or more...
Fair point. Will do that next iteration then.
>
> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>
Thanks,
Abel
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>
On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 12:43:26PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 16/11/2022 12:31, Abel Vesa wrote:
> > Document the compatible for SM8550.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Abel Vesa <[email protected]>
>
> Why this is not part of other SoC patches? I just received many single
> patches for this SM8550 topic. All these should be set of few series,
> not 10 or more...
>
Because these patches are independent of each other and done in this way
means the maintainer can merge each piece on its own. I much prefer this
over having these series with 20+ patches being sent over and over
because one of the patches is getting feedback.
Regards,
Bjorn
> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]>
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>
On 05/12/2022 22:16, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 12:43:26PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 16/11/2022 12:31, Abel Vesa wrote:
>>> Document the compatible for SM8550.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Abel Vesa <[email protected]>
>>
>> Why this is not part of other SoC patches? I just received many single
>> patches for this SM8550 topic. All these should be set of few series,
>> not 10 or more...
>>
>
> Because these patches are independent of each other and done in this way
> means the maintainer can merge each piece on its own. I much prefer this
> over having these series with 20+ patches being sent over and over
> because one of the patches is getting feedback.
But this one is patch for you, so should go with other patches targeting
Qualcomm subarch. Before submission, we discussed extensively the
proposed split per patches and it was agreed on. Yet this one here was a
surprise.
Best regards,
Krzysztof