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;
Message-ID: <d79e19e8-e15d-fe09-6ebc-c1f8aaacfc00@canonical.com>
Date:   Tue, 25 Jan 2022 14:21:54 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.5.0
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] arm64: dts: samsung: Second pull for v5.17
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linaro.org>
Cc:     Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        arm-soc <arm@kernel.org>, SoC Team <soc@kernel.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        "moderated list:ARM/SAMSUNG EXYNOS ARM ARCHITECTURES" 
        <linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
References: <20211227112959.7325-1-krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com>
 <CAPLW+4n-1H5Yu3wQaus-UJ_VW_TjHrNUHaPCGCMURXg8EqxjyA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAK8P3a1ou-ZdrXN0MHQoJ+gGbvhXT-e2qt96_f9M8VwrdX0pAg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOesGMgF3S5_XsWjEqq=-zfYXwOWFpFNA6afL81wceRUA_0FeQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPLW+4k8=ymx56R7bKOt8kMVG_uUgrTsCkVd5wiY_rkYq8dYbQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <72a50afd-df9f-ceb3-898e-070d70dc0221@canonical.com>
 <CAPLW+4=xaHA2a=-F4ikuUPDpoO8Waj7qrrfpgkift1aMi_hU+g@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPLW+4=xaHA2a=-F4ikuUPDpoO8Waj7qrrfpgkift1aMi_hU+g@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 24/01/2022 14:50, Sam Protsenko wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 at 21:27, Krzysztof Kozlowski
> <krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 22/01/2022 13:38, Sam Protsenko wrote:
>>> On Wed, 19 Jan 2022 at 18:53, Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 8:07 AM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Jan 19, 2022 at 4:11 PM Sam Protsenko
>>>>> <semen.protsenko@linaro.org> wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 27 Dec 2021 at 13:30, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Olof, Arnd,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just want to check if it's possible for those patches to be applied in
>>>>>> v5.17? Sorry for the noise, but that's important to me.
>>>>>
>>>>> I can see that Olof merged merged this into the "arm/late" branch in
>>>>> the soc tree,
>>>>> so I assume he still plans to send it in the next few days.
>>>>
>>>> Yep, will be sent up today most likely.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for detailed answer! Glad to hear it's still a possibility.
>>> Please let me know if you need any actions on my side (like rebasing,
>>> etc).
>>>
>>>>> With the timing over Christmas, I sent out the large bulk of the
>>>>> contents (anything
>>>>> I merged before Dec 23) last year, and Linus already merged it, the rest ended
>>>>> up in the "late" branch.
>>>>>
>>>>> As usual, there is no guarantee that late changes make it in, but I have seen
>>>>> no indication of any problems so far.
>>>>
>>>> Correct. Been sitting on it for a while in case there were fixes
>>>> coming in for the first pieces that got merged, but in traditional
>>>> fashion I'm guessing those will start to show up a few days after the
>>>> late branch gets merged. :)
>>
>> Olof,
>> v5.17-rc1 came earlier, so I see this part did not make into it. Is
>> there a chance for a past-rc1 pull to Linus with it?
>>
>> Sam,
>> Anyway the patches wont' get lost (you mentioned such worry in previous
>> email to me). They might just need to wait. Unfortunately if patch,
>> especially with new feature, is coming in the end of cycle, there is a
>> risk it won't make it. The patches have to wait a few days in my trees
>> before I send them to Arnd/Olof, so if the patch is coming after rc6, I
>> can push it to Arnd/Olof around rc7, you see there is very little time.
>>
> 
> Should I send the patch fixing hard-coded clock numbers though? I
> remember you said I should send it once -rc1 is out. But now that dts
> patches are not merged in mainline, I'm not sure it can still be
> applied?

Yeah, please wait.

We have few patches following that pull-request, so it will be actually
easier not to merge it to soc-tree but resend soon with the follow-ups.


Best regards,
Krzysztof