Re: [GIT PULL] soc/fsl drivers changes for next(v5.6)

[Olof Johansson]

On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 01:14:07PM -0600, Li Yang wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 12:41 PM Olof Johansson <olof@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 04:19:11PM -0600, Li Yang wrote:
> > > Hi soc maintainers,
> > >
> > > Please merge the following new changes for soc/fsl drivers.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Leo
> > >
> > >
> > > The following changes since commit e42617b825f8073569da76dc4510bfa019b1c35a:
> > >
> > >   Linux 5.5-rc1 (2019-12-08 14:57:55 -0800)
> > >
> > > are available in the Git repository at:
> > >
> > >   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/leo/linux.git tags/soc-fsl-next-v5.6
> > >
> > > for you to fetch changes up to 6e62bd36e9ad85a22d92b1adce6a0336ea549733:
> > >
> > >   soc: fsl: qe: remove set but not used variable 'mm_gc' (2020-01-08 16:02:48 -0600)
> > >
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > > NXP/FSL SoC driver updates for v5.6
> > >
> > > QUICC Engine drivers
> > > - Improve the QE drivers to be compatible with ARM/ARM64/PPC64
> > > architectures
> > > - Various cleanups to the QE drivers
> >
> > This branch contains a cross-section of drivers, including those who are
> > normally sent to other maintainers/subsystems. I don't see dependencies that
> > make them a requirement/easier to merge through the SoC tree at this time --
> > for example the ucc_uart driver updates are mostly independent cleanups.
> >
> > Am I missing some aspect here, or should those just be merged through
> > drivers/tty as other driver changes there? At the very least, we expect drivers
> > that aren't merged through the normal path to have acks from those maintainers.
> >
> > Mind following up on that? Thanks!
> 
> Hi Olof,
> 
> Some of the driver cleanups are dependent to core QE changes.  Some
> maybe not but could have contextual dependency with other patches.  I
> will be easier to have them all go in from the same place.  We have
> collected the ack and confirmation from all the related maintainers.
> For the ucc_uart it is not a formal ack.  Quoted the confirmation from
> Greg below:

Ok, getting that in the pull request (tag) would be useful for future cases.

Merging. Thanks!

-Olof