Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-45677-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Message-ID: <65b9b056.050a0220.2fde8.9be5@mx.google.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2024 03:28:34 +0100
From: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@gmail.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>, Andy Gross <agross@kernel.org>,
	Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>,
	Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
	Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>,
	Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
	Robert Marko <robert.marko@sartura.hr>,
	linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Jie Luo <quic_luoj@quicinc.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v2 3/3] arm64: dts: qcom: ipq8074: add
 clock-frequency to MDIO node
References: <20240130003546.1546-1-ansuelsmth@gmail.com>
 <20240130003546.1546-4-ansuelsmth@gmail.com>
 <b1ff77bc-0833-493a-b099-884c727f0341@lunn.ch>
 <65b84983.050a0220.e1700.35fd@mx.google.com>
 <20240130174041.74341188@kernel.org>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20240130174041.74341188@kernel.org>

On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 05:40:41PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 01:57:36 +0100 Christian Marangi wrote:
> > > If we merge this via netdev, is a merge conflict likely? Any other
> > > changes expected in this area, given the changes which might happen to
> > > GCC soon, etc?
> > > 
> > > Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
> > 
> > Honestly I don't expect much to change here in the mdio node.
> > 
> > If it's a problem I can submit in a separate patch in linux-msm.
> 
> The arch maintainers usually prefer to take the DTS patches,
> so if there isn't anything special here we should probably
> default to that.

Thanks for the suggestion I sent v3 with the DTS patch dropped and I
sent that patch separately.

-- 
	Ansuel