Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
From:   "Hyunki Koo" <hyunki00.koo@samsung.com>
To:     "'Greg KH'" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc:     <robh+dt@kernel.org>, <linux-serial@vger.kernel.org>,
        <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20200424053711.GB103562@kroah.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v8 0/3] 32-bit access for TX/RX hold registers for
 samsung_tty driver
Date:   Mon, 27 Apr 2020 08:15:02 +0900
Message-ID: <000001d61c20$837914d0$8a6b3e70$@samsung.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thread-Index: AQLkGOxny2DlkaWSmHdwQHeE1CDJ+wFPPr0wAw52+mwDJ5UScQCvjpF1pi5nRLA=
Content-Language: ko
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
CMS-TYPE: 102P
DLP-Filter: Pass
References: <20200420013300.17249-1-hyunki00.koo@samsung.com>
        <CGME20200420233607epcas2p305dbd652ab73592a32c17773c1fce329@epcas2p3.samsung.com>
        <20200420233558.11879-1-hyunki00.koo@samsung.com>
        <000a01d619d0$ee167730$ca436590$@samsung.com>
        <20200424053711.GB103562@kroah.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 02:37:18PM +0900, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 09:40:18AM +0900, Hyunki Koo wrote:
> > On Sat, April 21, 2020 at 08:36:00 AM +0900, Hyunki Koo wrote:
> > >
> > > Change in v8:
> > > - spit into 3 patch
> > >   =5B1/3=5D create the new functions with no functional change to the
> > > code as- is.
> > >   Replace rd_regb/wr_regb with rd_reg/wr_reg for general usage.
> > >   =5B2/3=5D add the new binding reg-io-width in device tree
> > >   =5B3/3=5D add the new funtinality of rd_reg / wr_reg and wr_reg_bar=
rier
> > >         to support 32-bit access for the TX/RX hold registers UTXH an=
d
> URXH.
> > >
> > > Change in v7:
> > > - =5B1/2=5D correct build error on running 'make dt_binding_check'
> > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/samsung_uart.yaml:
> mapping
> > > values are not allowed in this context
> > >   in =22<unicode string>=22, line 36, column 13
> > >   Documentation/devicetree/bindings/Makefile:12: recipe for target
> > >
> 'Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/samsung_uart.example.dts'
> > > failed
> > >   make=5B1=5D: ***
> > >
> =5BDocumentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/samsung_uart.example.dts=5D
> > > Error 1
> > >   make=5B1=5D: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
> > >   Makefile:1262: recipe for target 'dt_binding_check' failed
> > >   make: *** =5Bdt_binding_check=5D Error 2
> > > - =5B2/2=5D add commit message of reviewed by and tested by in commit
> > > message
> > >   Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk=40kernel.org>
> > >   Tested on Odroid HC1 (Exynos5422):
> > >   Tested-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk=40kernel.org>
> > >
> > > Change in v6:
> > > - =5B2/2=5D clean description of reg-io-width
> > >   allOf is not needed. Just enum =5B1, 2=5D is enough.
> > >
> > > Changes in v5:
> > > - spit into 2 patch, newly added patch for dt-binding
> > >   =5B1/2=5D newly added dt-binding and go as first patch in this seri=
es.
> > >   =5B2/2=5D go as second patch in this series.
> > >
> > > Changes in v4:
> > > - correct variable types and change misleading function name
> > >
> > > Changes in v3:
> > > - line 2031: remove redundant init value  for ourport->port.iotype
> > >
> > > Changes in v2:
> > > - line 954 : change rd_regl to rd_reg in for backward compatibility.
> > > - line 2031: Add init value for ourport->port.iotype  to UPIO_MEM
> > >
> > >
> > > Hyunki Koo (3):
> > >   serial: samsung: Replace rd_regb/wr_regb with rd_reg/wr_reg
> > >   dt-bindings: serial: Add reg-io-width compatible
> > >   tty: samsung_tty: 32-bit access for TX/RX hold registers
> > >
> > >  .../devicetree/bindings/serial/samsung_uart.yaml   =7C  8 +++
> > >  drivers/tty/serial/samsung_tty.c                   =7C 76
> ++++++++++++++++++---
> > > -
> > >  2 files changed, 72 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > --
> > > 2.15.0.rc1
> >
> > Hi Greg KH
> >
> > Can I ask is this series patch are acceptable or not?
> > Do you think, I have to do any further action  for this patch?
> >
>=20
> It's been 3 days, give us a chance please...
>=20
> Also, I need to wait for the dt patch to be reviewed first before I can t=
ake
> any of this, so that's up to the DT maintainers.
>=20
> thanks,
>=20
> greg k-h

Sorry to disturb you and Thank you for your answer,
I will wait.