Message-ID: <5c67ecd2-075a-5b0b-feb9-57570f539ee1@linaro.org>
Date:   Tue, 14 Feb 2023 10:44:12 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.7.1
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 2/5] arm64: dts: qcom: Add support for Crashdump
 collection on IPQ9574
Content-Language: en-US
To:     POOVENDHAN SELVARAJ <quic_poovendh@quicinc.com>, agross@kernel.org,
        andersson@kernel.org, konrad.dybcio@linaro.org, robh+dt@kernel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org, lee@kernel.org,
        mturquette@baylibre.com, sboyd@kernel.org,
        jassisinghbrar@gmail.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org,
        shawnguo@kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de, marcel.ziswiler@toradex.com,
        robimarko@gmail.com, dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org,
        nfraprado@collabora.com, broonie@kernel.org,
        quic_gurus@quicinc.com, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc:     quic_srichara@quicinc.com, quic_gokulsri@quicinc.com,
        quic_sjaganat@quicinc.com, quic_kathirav@quicinc.com,
        quic_arajkuma@quicinc.com, quic_anusha@quicinc.com,
        quic_devipriy@quicinc.com
References: <20230208053332.16537-1-quic_poovendh@quicinc.com>
 <20230208053332.16537-3-quic_poovendh@quicinc.com>
 <dbc93125-afd5-9ed9-7b45-0d79f728b4a5@linaro.org>
 <1a9ad881-7753-935a-ce7d-a2a79d34f16c@quicinc.com>
 <e569e7e8-4d7f-1e69-5a4b-ee4c4f83d7ce@linaro.org>
 <86bb95e4-2e07-19a5-7b4f-15f25067d513@quicinc.com>
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <86bb95e4-2e07-19a5-7b4f-15f25067d513@quicinc.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 14/02/2023 10:35, POOVENDHAN SELVARAJ wrote:
>>>> compatible = "arm,cortex-a73-pmu";
>>>> interrupts = <GIC_PPI 7 (GIC_CPU_MASK_SIMPLE(4) | IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH)>;
>  >>> @@ -95,11 +102,17 @@
>>>> #address-cells = <2>;
>>>> #size-cells = <2>;
>>>> ranges;
> *>>> -*
>  >> I don't think anything improved here - still unrelated change.
>  >>
> 
> Are you referring to the deleted line here?

Yes, the line removal does not seem related nor justified.

Best regards,
Krzysztof