Anson Huang Best Regards!
> -----Original Message----- > From: Fabio Estevam [mailto:feste...@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, July 2, 2018 9:00 AM > To: Anson Huang <anson.hu...@nxp.com> > Cc: Shawn Guo <shawn...@kernel.org>; Robin Gong <yibin.g...@nxp.com>; > Mark Rutland <mark.rutl...@arm.com>; open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND > FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS <devicet...@vger.kernel.org>; > linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; Rob Herring > <robh...@kernel.org>; dl-linux-imx <linux-...@nxp.com>; Sascha Hauer > <ker...@pengutronix.de>; Fabio Estevam <fabio.este...@nxp.com>; > moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE > <linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] ARM: dts: imx6sl-evk: keep sw4 always on > > Hi Anson, > > On Sun, Jul 1, 2018 at 9:57 PM, Anson Huang <anson.hu...@nxp.com> wrote: > > > Just want to know how to handle such case? The kernel patch will never > > be applied or is there any way to make kernel patch and dtb patch > > applied together to avoid any breakage? > > We always want to avoid breaking a working dtb when it is used with a newer > kernel. > > In this case we need to revert the kernel patch as it causes regression with > old > dtbs. So that mean such kind of kernel patch will never be into kernel? Even if it is a necessary patch for fixing some other issues? I just wonder how this case being handled. Anson.
