Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Wed, 6 Jul 2022 16:46:13 -0600
From:   Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
To:     Wolfram Sang <wsa@kernel.org>,
        Alain Volmat <alain.volmat@foss.st.com>, mark.rutland@arm.com,
        pierre-yves.mordret@foss.st.com, mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com,
        alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        fabrice.gasnier@foss.st.com, amelie.delaunay@foss.st.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] dt-bindings: i2c: st,stm32-i2c: don't mandate a
 reset line
Message-ID: <20220706224613.GD572635-robh@kernel.org>
References: <20220620105405.145959-1-alain.volmat@foss.st.com>
 <20220620105405.145959-2-alain.volmat@foss.st.com>
 <20220628134115.GA345270-robh@kernel.org>
 <YryrpbBKsAKcL865@shikoro>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YryrpbBKsAKcL865@shikoro>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 09:44:37PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 07:41:15AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 12:54:02PM +0200, Alain Volmat wrote:
> > > Update the dt-bindings of the i2c-stm32 drivers to avoid the
> > > needs for a reset property in the device-tree.
> > 
> > That is clear from the diff, but why. Some chips don't have a reset? 
> > If so, this should be combined with patch 2 as part of changes needed 
> > for a new version.
> 
> What do you mean? Patches 1+2 should be squashed together? I can do this
> when applying. Or do you mean something else?

Sorry, I meant combined with patch 3. If the new chip added in patch 3 
doesn't have a reset, then 1 and 3 should be 1 patch. IOW, all the 
changes needed for a new chip in 1 patch.

Rob