From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from Atcsqr.andestech.com (60-248-80-70.hinet-ip.hinet.net [60.248.80.70]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7A1242D77E5 for ; Fri, 4 Jul 2025 13:07:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=60.248.80.70 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1751634477; cv=none; b=mStxFziHWjV83kwIN5RlIdQWQjU82JhKP/cN96V7U0qiEJkfmgketFrbTNIlGNn0ffjPwkezU0MJye2P9r18FHFKN20GhUH3yEEFmPq+RzaWHZjHWxlhgUSdCy9pBUuch8JcBQ2vEdWkb7CZRq6QWlAaRs5zHKeUWBqs2WVln5E= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1751634477; c=relaxed/simple; bh=extDsVbb9anmJOT/i+066iso1LSucl2pzA4ay2dJ1j0=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=fzFLSOZsDFIGgTdX96euir5rbgIdEshoAnmL7U31QLhhc+9SYPvfcVuhoToLcJFIB1UlkBNPWjBUyw26OCXWPy2KFnK6CuZa67WXuhzrIDKfIbnSwXTQy38QbE1+rmVApGoydkXSB2I6XjmAEKAOadWo1hvqMwFJ4tNqgef2HWg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=andestech.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=andestech.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=60.248.80.70 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=andestech.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=andestech.com Received: from mail.andestech.com (ATCPCS34.andestech.com [10.0.1.134]) by Atcsqr.andestech.com with ESMTPS id 564D75Qd002650 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=OK); Fri, 4 Jul 2025 21:07:05 +0800 (+08) (envelope-from ben717@andestech.com) Received: from atctrx.andestech.com (10.0.15.173) by ATCPCS34.andestech.com (10.0.1.134) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2507.39; Fri, 4 Jul 2025 21:07:05 +0800 Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2025 21:07:05 +0800 From: Ben Zong-You Xie To: Krzysztof Kozlowski CC: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] add Voyager board support Message-ID: References: <20250704081451.2011407-1-ben717@andestech.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/2.1.4 (2021-12-11) X-ClientProxiedBy: ATCPCS33.andestech.com (10.0.1.100) To ATCPCS34.andestech.com (10.0.1.134) X-DKIM-Results: atcpcs34.andestech.com; dkim=none; X-DNSRBL: X-SPAM-SOURCE-CHECK: pass X-MAIL:Atcsqr.andestech.com 564D75Qd002650 On Fri, Jul 04, 2025 at 11:15:43AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > Also, there is a patch dependency in this patchset: > > Patch 2 <- Patch 4 <- Patch 5 <- Patch 6 > > How? These are bindings. How DTS can depend on the binding? Do you have > akcs from their subsystem maintainers that you are sending it here? > > Sorry, but no, this should go via their maintainers, unless they did not > want to pick it up. Is this the case here? The dependency chain arises because each of these patches introduces a new file, requiring a corresponding update to the MAINTAINERS file. In v4 [1], Rob and Daniel attempted to merge Patch 4 and Patch 5, respectively, but encountered conflicts in the MAINTAINERS file. That's why I specified the patch dependencies in v5 and this patchset. Now, I understand that binding patches are typically handled by subsystem maintainers. To prevent the conflicts again, I think I should gather all MAINTAINERS file changes into a single patch. Is that right? [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250514095350.3765716-1-ben717@andestech.com/ Thanks, Ben