Re: [PATCH 0/2] phy: cdns-dphy: hs-clk improvement and a cleanup

[Devarsh Thakkar <devarsht@ti.com>]

Gentle reminder.

Hi Vinod,

On 12/08/25 11:32, devarsh wrote:
> Hi Vinod, Kishon,
> 
> On 06/08/25 16:24, Vinod Koul wrote:
>> On 05-08-25, 15:03, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
>>> Hi Vinod, Kishon,
>>>
>>> On 23/07/2025 13:01, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
>>>> A cdns-dphy improvement to return the actual hs clock rate, and a
>>>> cleanup to remove leftover code.
>>>>
>>>> These were part of a Cadence DSI series:
>>>>
>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250618-cdns-dsi-impro-v4-0-862c841dbe02%40ideasonboard.com/
>>>>
>>>> but are now separately here for easier merging.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ideasonboard.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> Tomi Valkeinen (2):
>>>>        phy: cdns-dphy: Store hs_clk_rate and return it
>>>>        phy: cdns-dphy: Remove leftover code
>>>>
>>>>   drivers/phy/cadence/cdns-dphy.c | 24 +++++++++---------------
>>>>   1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>>>> ---
>>>> base-commit: 89be9a83ccf1f88522317ce02f854f30d6115c41
>>>> change-id: 20250723-cdns-dphy-hs-clk-rate-fix-a8857a5789dd
>>>
>>> Is this good to merge, and if so, do you have any estimate when? While
>>> this is independent from the DSI series, I'd rather push the DSI series
>>> into drm-misc about the same time, so both would appear in linux-next
>>> relatively together.
>>
>> I will start taking patches after merge window closes next monday, so
>> next week should be a good estimate
> 
> On top of this series [1], we have the cadence DPHY fixes for fixing PLL
> lockup timeout [2] and one more patch which enables lower resolutions
> [3], both have been reviewed and tested too.
> 
> Would it be possible for you too merge all 3 together in below order ?
> 
> [1]:
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/cc0e4cf5-1bd9-4ae3-a130-0483dbfc6335@ideasonboard.com/
> [2]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250704125915.1224738-1-devarsht@ti.com/
> [3]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250807052002.717807-1-h-shenoy@ti.com/
>

As I understand we see [1] got merged to linux-next but [2] and [3] are 
still pending. Could you please let us know if anything further required 
on our side for these two i.e. [2] and [3] ?

Regards
Devarsh

> Kindly let us know if anything required from our side.
> 
> Regards
> Devarsh
>