From: Patrice Chotard <[email protected]>
Enable support for QSPI block on STM32 SoCs.
Signed-off-by: Patrice Chotard <[email protected]>
---
arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig b/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig
index 6a40bc2ef271..78d1d93298af 100644
--- a/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig
+++ b/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig
@@ -403,6 +403,7 @@ CONFIG_SPI_SH_MSIOF=m
CONFIG_SPI_SH_HSPI=y
CONFIG_SPI_SIRF=y
CONFIG_SPI_STM32=m
+CONFIG_SPI_STM32_QSPI=m
CONFIG_SPI_SUN4I=y
CONFIG_SPI_SUN6I=y
CONFIG_SPI_TEGRA114=y
--
2.17.1
Hi Patrice,
If you cc [email protected] on patches you want us to apply, you'll get
them automatically tracked by patchwork.
-Olof
On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 3:55 PM <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> From: Patrice Chotard <[email protected]>
>
> Enable support for QSPI block on STM32 SoCs.
>
> Signed-off-by: Patrice Chotard <[email protected]>
> ---
> arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig b/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig
> index 6a40bc2ef271..78d1d93298af 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig
> +++ b/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig
> @@ -403,6 +403,7 @@ CONFIG_SPI_SH_MSIOF=m
> CONFIG_SPI_SH_HSPI=y
> CONFIG_SPI_SIRF=y
> CONFIG_SPI_STM32=m
> +CONFIG_SPI_STM32_QSPI=m
> CONFIG_SPI_SUN4I=y
> CONFIG_SPI_SUN6I=y
> CONFIG_SPI_TEGRA114=y
> --
> 2.17.1
>
Hi Olof
On 7/30/19 7:36 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
> Hi Patrice,
>
> If you cc [email protected] on patches you want us to apply, you'll get
> them automatically tracked by patchwork.
>
Does it means that you will take it directly in arm-soc tree ?
I mean, I used to take this kind of patch (multi-v7_defconfig patch
linked to STM32 driver) in my stm32 branch and to send PR for them.
regards
Alex
>
> -Olof
>
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 3:55 PM <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> From: Patrice Chotard <[email protected]>
>>
>> Enable support for QSPI block on STM32 SoCs.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Patrice Chotard <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig | 1 +
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig b/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig
>> index 6a40bc2ef271..78d1d93298af 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig
>> +++ b/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig
>> @@ -403,6 +403,7 @@ CONFIG_SPI_SH_MSIOF=m
>> CONFIG_SPI_SH_HSPI=y
>> CONFIG_SPI_SIRF=y
>> CONFIG_SPI_STM32=m
>> +CONFIG_SPI_STM32_QSPI=m
>> CONFIG_SPI_SUN4I=y
>> CONFIG_SPI_SUN6I=y
>> CONFIG_SPI_TEGRA114=y
>> --
>> 2.17.1
>>
Hi OLof
On 7/30/19 7:36 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
> Hi Patrice,
>
> If you cc [email protected] on patches you want us to apply, you'll get
> them automatically tracked by patchwork.
Thanks for the information, i will resubmit it.
Patrice
>
>
> -Olof
>
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 3:55 PM <[email protected]> wrote:
>> From: Patrice Chotard <[email protected]>
>>
>> Enable support for QSPI block on STM32 SoCs.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Patrice Chotard <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig | 1 +
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig b/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig
>> index 6a40bc2ef271..78d1d93298af 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig
>> +++ b/arch/arm/configs/multi_v7_defconfig
>> @@ -403,6 +403,7 @@ CONFIG_SPI_SH_MSIOF=m
>> CONFIG_SPI_SH_HSPI=y
>> CONFIG_SPI_SIRF=y
>> CONFIG_SPI_STM32=m
>> +CONFIG_SPI_STM32_QSPI=m
>> CONFIG_SPI_SUN4I=y
>> CONFIG_SPI_SUN6I=y
>> CONFIG_SPI_TEGRA114=y
>> --
>> 2.17.1
>>
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 8:48 AM Alexandre Torgue
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Olof
>
> On 7/30/19 7:36 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
> > Hi Patrice,
> >
> > If you cc [email protected] on patches you want us to apply, you'll get
> > them automatically tracked by patchwork.
> >
>
> Does it means that you will take it directly in arm-soc tree ?
> I mean, I used to take this kind of patch (multi-v7_defconfig patch
> linked to STM32 driver) in my stm32 branch and to send PR for them.
You can do that too -- it was unclear to me whether you posted the
patch with us in the To: line because you wanted it applied or not.
-Olof
On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 3:20 PM Olof Johansson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 8:48 AM Alexandre Torgue
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Olof
> >
> > On 7/30/19 7:36 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
> > > Hi Patrice,
> > >
> > > If you cc [email protected] on patches you want us to apply, you'll get
> > > them automatically tracked by patchwork.
> > >
> >
> > Does it means that you will take it directly in arm-soc tree ?
> > I mean, I used to take this kind of patch (multi-v7_defconfig patch
> > linked to STM32 driver) in my stm32 branch and to send PR for them.
>
> You can do that too -- it was unclear to me whether you posted the
> patch with us in the To: line because you wanted it applied or not.
Also, we request that platform maintainers keep the defconfig updates
in a separate branch, since we normally track them in a separate
branch on our side. So if you do it in the future, please send
separate PR.
For single patches, it's just as easy to send us the patch as a pull request.
Thanks,
-Olof
On 7/31/19 3:21 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 3:20 PM Olof Johansson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 8:48 AM Alexandre Torgue
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Olof
>>>
>>> On 7/30/19 7:36 PM, Olof Johansson wrote:
>>>> Hi Patrice,
>>>>
>>>> If you cc [email protected] on patches you want us to apply, you'll get
>>>> them automatically tracked by patchwork.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Does it means that you will take it directly in arm-soc tree ?
>>> I mean, I used to take this kind of patch (multi-v7_defconfig patch
>>> linked to STM32 driver) in my stm32 branch and to send PR for them.
>>
>> You can do that too -- it was unclear to me whether you posted the
>> patch with us in the To: line because you wanted it applied or not.
>
> Also, we request that platform maintainers keep the defconfig updates
> in a separate branch, since we normally track them in a separate
> branch on our side. So if you do it in the future, please send
> separate PR.
>
> For single patches, it's just as easy to send us the patch as a pull request.
>
Ok. So I'll continue as I did :)
Thanks for clarifications
Alex
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Olof
>