Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753049AbbDFQs1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Apr 2015 12:48:27 -0400 Received: from mail-lb0-f174.google.com ([209.85.217.174]:32789 "EHLO mail-lb0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752766AbbDFQsZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Apr 2015 12:48:25 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1425076217-10415-1-git-send-email-bjorn.andersson@sonymobile.com> Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2015 09:48:23 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] DT: hwspinlock: Add binding documentation for Qualcomm hwmutex From: Bjorn Andersson To: Ohad Ben-Cohen Cc: Tim Bird , Bjorn Andersson , Rob Herring , Pawel Moll , Mark Rutland , Ian Campbell , Kumar Gala , Suman Anna , "linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org" , Jeffrey Hugo , Andy Gross , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Andrew Morton , Kevin Hilman , Arnd Bergmann Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2388 Lines: 54 On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 9:31 AM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote: > On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 7:22 PM, Tim Bird wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 6:55 AM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote: >>> On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 9:11 PM, Tim Bird wrote: >>>> On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 9:40 PM, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote: >>>>> Sorry, I can't take this without a DT ack. >>>> >>>> Hmmm. >>>> >>>> The policy seems to be: >>>> "For driver (not subsystem) bindings: If you are comfortable with the >>>> binding, and it hasn't received an Acked-by from the devicetree >>>> maintainers after a few weeks, go ahead and take it." >>>> >>>> The syscon property is only relative to the qcom hwspinlock driver, >>>> (unless I'm missing something) and both Qualcomm and Sony devs are >>>> OK with it. So while an ACK from the DT side would be nice, I don't >>>> think it's required. This is exactly the type of delay that is really >>>> holding up a lot of out-of-tree code. >>> >>> Sorry, I do prefer to make sure Mark is OK with this devicetree patch, >>> especially since it wasn't clear whether Mark is entirely comfortable >>> with it in his last response. >> >> Just to be clear - do you personally have any objections to the patch? > > No, but this patch is for a folder I don't maintain so I prefer > someone who does to take a look. > > Mark did take a look, and said he's confused by this patch (see this thread). > > Do you want me to ignore him and just send it to Linus anyway? Ohad, Tim, For this patch to be useful to us we also need Suman's DT patch, so we should try to get them both in asap. Based on the long discussion we had on one of the previous iterations of Suman's DT binding, with the DT maintainers I believe that it would be fine to move along and sent Suman's patches to Linus - without an explicit Ack from the DT guys (or did I just miss one?). Regarding this patch I agree with Ohad that it would be good if we verify that Mark's question is answered before moving on. So I will reach out to him to see if he has any remaining concerns. Regards, Bjorn -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/