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:   Tue, 13 Dec 2022 22:03:10 +0300
From:   Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru>
To:     Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
CC:     Vidya Sagar <vidyas@nvidia.com>, Jon Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
        Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@kernel.org>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pci tree with the arm-soc tree
Message-ID: <20221213190310.sztjn5nnwuubrtbg@mobilestation>
References: <20221205095738.607b9551@canb.auug.org.au>
 <20221213162103.GA106222@bhelgaas>
 <Y5is9cp6WdWixwgU@orome>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Y5is9cp6WdWixwgU@orome>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 05:48:53PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 10:21:03AM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 09:57:38AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > > 
> > > Today's linux-next merge of the pci tree got a conflict in:
> > > 
> > >   Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/snps,dw-pcie.yaml
> > > 
> > > between commit:
> > > 
> > >   5c3741492d2e ("dt-bindings: PCI: tegra234: Add ECAM support")
> > > 
> > > from the arm-soc tree and commit:
> > > 
> > >   4cc13eedb892 ("dt-bindings: PCI: dwc: Add reg/reg-names common properties")
> > > 
> > > from the pci tree.
> > > 
> > > I didn't know how to fix this up, so I just used the latter (and so lost
> > > the addition of "ecam").
> > 
> > Did I miss a suggested resolution for this?
> 

> We had a brief discussion about this in another thread. So basically
> Stephen's resolution is fine here and the plan is to instead add the
> ECAM bits that the Tegra patch does in a separate patch on top of
> Serge's patch. I should get around to sending that patch tomorrow.
> 
> Thierry

Actually the discussion still goes. I haven't got a respond to my
last suggestion which seems to me more reasonable than extending the
DT-bindings with another vendor-specific reg-name. @Bjorn, please join
the discussion here:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/20221114155333.234496-2-jonathanh@nvidia.com/

-Sergey