From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 546FFC04EBD for ; Tue, 16 Oct 2018 13:25:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E4DD2089E for ; Tue, 16 Oct 2018 13:25:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b="vgKyAD2C" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 0E4DD2089E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=ti.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727123AbeJPVQS (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Oct 2018 17:16:18 -0400 Received: from fllv0016.ext.ti.com ([198.47.19.142]:44612 "EHLO fllv0016.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727067AbeJPVQS (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Oct 2018 17:16:18 -0400 Received: from dlelxv90.itg.ti.com ([172.17.2.17]) by fllv0016.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id w9GDPgwY019792; Tue, 16 Oct 2018 08:25:42 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1539696342; bh=trZjiQQAJhueUbaTek0D6x1pWdJ66wmy0Gp59ZxtHKQ=; h=Subject:To:CC:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=vgKyAD2CEd6KSSB9RsasfuV7VdTaN/Te8uPtDseXS/pWpnrEsO5P3KCFE1TJIW8ye O9LtTgzO2B0+XDdN9rpWobMMtAxqj47CSC+iEFdTvRAZcTIHb9UDwOsChOTMyMKPEM B1o0jnhKZfwpTnBIqN6aVvQreEtGXEdutBOM3mYE= Received: from DFLE104.ent.ti.com (dfle104.ent.ti.com [10.64.6.25]) by dlelxv90.itg.ti.com (8.14.3/8.13.8) with ESMTP id w9GDPfNV017024; Tue, 16 Oct 2018 08:25:41 -0500 Received: from DFLE100.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.21) by DFLE104.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.25) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1466.3; Tue, 16 Oct 2018 08:25:41 -0500 Received: from dflp33.itg.ti.com (10.64.6.16) by DFLE100.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_0, cipher=TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA) id 15.1.1466.3 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 16 Oct 2018 08:25:41 -0500 Received: from [172.22.180.47] (ileax41-snat.itg.ti.com [10.172.224.153]) by dflp33.itg.ti.com (8.14.3/8.13.8) with ESMTP id w9GDPf7B007170; Tue, 16 Oct 2018 08:25:41 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/9] dt-bindings: ti-lmu: Remove LM3697 To: Pavel Machek CC: Jacek Anaszewski , Rob Herring , Lee Jones , Tony Lindgren , , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Linux LED Subsystem References: <20181011165123.32198-3-dmurphy@ti.com> <20181011182734.GA7973@amd> <4fcb91c7-b2b2-798d-8a41-fa1b475086e0@ti.com> <8c1559e1-b703-4c98-8bd9-7c9993bd59f5@gmail.com> <20181012162619.GA28573@bogus> <20181012180312.GB5565@amd> <60cc9238-aba2-aa6a-64a4-2b5e20835549@gmail.com> <73647af4-0258-49a9-d9b6-eeef7e7813dc@gmail.com> <5c7f03cc-4d45-6010-523d-46721c218731@ti.com> <20181015214512.GA2001@amd> From: Dan Murphy Message-ID: Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2018 08:25:36 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20181015214512.GA2001@amd> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Thanks On 10/15/2018 04:45 PM, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > >>>> Given this one seems to have not really been finished, it's probably >>>> okay to make changes in this case. Still, it would be good to see >>>> patches structured so that it's obvious we're breaking things. But how >>>> the patches are structured doesn't matter until there's some agreement >>>> on the end result. >>> >>> OK, so if I'm getting it right, the correct patch structure in this case >>> means that changes removing bindings from MFD and moving them along >>> with the modifications to the LED subsystem should be placed in a single >>> patch. >>> >>> Dan, could you please arrange the next patch set version accordingly? >> >> Yes I can squash the DT bindings patches and call it a "move and modify" > > You can do move without problems. But if you plan to modify them, > please try to change as little as possible, make it separate patch and > explain why new version is better than old one. > I have been thinking of how to do this. Since the 2 devices are part of the current binding there really is not a way to move them. Since there are still MFD capable devices available. I would still need to remove the current active binding and create a new binding in the LED bindings directory. I would have to remove and create in the same patch. Dan > Thanks, > Pavel > -- ------------------ Dan Murphy