From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1751282AbeAVP55 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Mon, 22 Jan 2018 10:57:57 -0500
Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([184.105.139.130]:35878 "EHLO
        shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751215AbeAVP5y (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Mon, 22 Jan 2018 10:57:54 -0500
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 10:57:50 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <20180122.105750.1953487955261969355.davem@davemloft.net>
To: andrew@lunn.ch
Cc: mw@semihalf.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        antoine.tenart@free-electrons.com,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, graeme.gregory@linaro.org,
        linux@armlinux.org.uk, rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com,
        f.fainelli@gmail.com, thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com,
        gregory.clement@free-electrons.com, stefanc@marvell.com,
        nadavh@marvell.com, neta@marvell.com, ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org,
        jaz@semihalf.com, tn@semihalf.com
Subject: Re: [net-next: PATCH v4 0/7] Armada 7k/8k PP2 ACPI support
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
In-Reply-To: <20180122144342.GB16923@lunn.ch>
References: <CAPv3WKeqEd6Hcy0NdPpiVVA1ioUYY4zs_0zai2gwkCPtM1yaJg@mail.gmail.com>
        <20180122.093525.1549534484738907077.davem@davemloft.net>
        <20180122144342.GB16923@lunn.ch>
X-Mailer: Mew version 6.7 on Emacs 25.3 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 15:43:42 +0100

> On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 09:35:25AM -0500, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Marcin Wojtas <mw@semihalf.com>
>> Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 14:00:37 +0100
>> 
>> > There's a discussion about the ACPI vs generic MDIO/PHY change under
>> > initial version of the patchset, however the patches in question were
>> > for now abandoned from further re-sends.
>> 
>> But doesn't the results of that discussion determine whether the way ACPI
>> is being used in this patch series is what we want to do or not?
> 
> Hi David
> 
> The patches submitted here don't involve any ACPI for MDIO or PHY. It
> is all MAC. And it is using standard ACPI primitives for devices,
> nothing new.
> 
> It is not setting any precedence for MDIO and PHY. That is totally out
> of scope for these patches. Whatever is decided for MDIO and PHY can
> be added later.

Thanks for all of the clarifications.

Series applied to net-next, thank you.