Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAOesGMjVUCd9bN=pggS-ECjMR42b0SqXKewsp+NYFSVqRgSWrg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20191107211801.GA107543@google.com> <20191108110736.GA10708@e121166-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
In-Reply-To: <20191108110736.GA10708@e121166-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
From:   Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
Date:   Fri, 8 Nov 2019 14:29:31 -0800
Message-ID: <CAOesGMhxs0A-YTXpS9Lqk_sn2=Q5jaCM2+mjEuvtwSX9Y49eMw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pci tree with the arm-soc tree
To:     Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
Cc:     Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Xiaowei Bao <xiaowei.bao@nxp.com>,
        Hou Zhiqiang <Zhiqiang.Hou@nxp.com>,
        Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com>,
        Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 3:07 AM Lorenzo Pieralisi
<lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 03:18:01PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 10:27:20AM -0800, Olof Johansson wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 2:46 PM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > Today's linux-next merge of the pci tree got a conflict in:
> > > >
> > > >   arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/fsl-ls1028a.dtsi
> > > >
> > > > between commit:
> > > >
> > > >   68e36a429ef5 ("arm64: dts: ls1028a: Move thermal-zone out of SoC")
> > > >
> > > > from the arm-soc tree and commit:
> > > >
> > > >   8d49ebe713ab ("arm64: dts: ls1028a: Add PCIe controller DT nodes")
> > >
> > > Bjorn, we ask that driver subsystem maintainers don't pick up DT
> > > changes since it causes conflicts like these.
> > >
> > > Is it easy for you to drop this patch, or are we stuck with it?
> > > Ideally it should never have been sent to you in the first place. :(
> >
> > Lorenzo, is it feasible for you to drop it from your pci/layerscape
> > branch and repush it?  If so, I can redo the merge into my "next"
> > branch.
>
> Done. Should we ignore all dts updates from now onwards ?

Thanks!

Indeed, dts updates should only go in through the platform maintainers
(i.e. through soc tree), unless there are strong reasons to bring them
in through driver trees.

If there's a need for a dt-include to be shared between driver and
dts, getting them on a stable branch that's merged through both trees
is usually the best way. Reach out when that happens and we can
coordinate.


Regards,

-Olof