On Thursday, January 3, 2019 10:39:08 PM CET Petr Štetiar wrote: > Christian Lamparter <chunk...@gmail.com> [2019-01-03 18:27:40]: > > > I would try to split up the patch into multiple patches so that > > each maintainer has the chance to act on just his own turf. > > I don't want to waste more of my time on such noop stuff, I've tried it so > let's see how it pans out :-)
Well, I've split both patches (this and gpio-leds) up and put them into my staging tree. <https://git.openwrt.org/?p=openwrt/staging/chunkeey.git;a=shortlog> The at91, apm821xx, ipq40xx, ipq806x, layerscape and oxnas are probably ready to be merged. The situation with ramips, ath79 and lantiq is a bit more complicated: <https://git.openwrt.org/?p=openwrt/staging/chunkeey.git;a=commit;h=784c3a84edc30d801a4c06c8ab5a551a95aadbb2> <https://git.openwrt.org/?p=openwrt/staging/chunkeey.git;a=commit;h=2dd5806aa930199cf3fc72231bf802d9789011a4> because some of these devices also have a separated ath9k-leds and in theory these nodes "could be merged". However, this is going to be a bad idea and so I left the "gpio-leds" in these cases as is. Maybe "soc-leds" could be a better name, but I don't think upstream will care much about that. > > > Keep in mind that linux-kernel is heavily compartmentalized. The device-tree > > maintainers mainly just ack/review patches for the subsystem maintainers. > > Yea, just give me some feedback and I'm more then happy to do what is > necessary to finish this crusade, but until then I'll just put it on ice. Feedback for merging patches upstream or into openwrt? For upstream: Have you talked to Rob or Mark? Usually, they do review device-tree changes related to drivers and suchs relatively quickly. However, something must have caused them to ignore the default-state = off patch. I can't even find it in the devicetree patchwork. maybe it was too big? > > While looking at the checklist, I noticed that one of the "SPDX license tag" > > check is already automated in the upstream scripts/checkpatch.pl... And now, > > I wish that the script could also act on default-state = "off", the > > "gpio-keys-polled" and "gpio-leds" node names, etc. > > Indeed, it would be nice to automate this and other checks and integrate it > into GitHub's PR pipeline via some CI system. Well, one day :-) Why not start there? Upstream has a accumulated a vast library of semantic patches (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/) and from what I can tell, these have a pretty good track record to get accepted. (I guess the main difficulty here will be to check whenever spatch already supports dts/dtsi files or not). Regards, Christian _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
