On Tue, Apr 01, 2025 at 05:27:30PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 01/04/2025 16:44, Tom Rini wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 27, 2025 at 03:58:52PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >> On 27/03/2025 15:50, Christian Marangi wrote: > >>> On Thu, Mar 27, 2025 at 03:43:47PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >>>> On 14/03/2025 19:59, Christian Marangi wrote: > >>>>> Drop NUM_CLOCKS define for EN7581 dts/upstream/src/include. This is not > >>>>> a binding and > >>>>> should not be placed here. Value is derived internally in the user > >>>>> driver. > >>>>> > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Christian Marangi <ansuels...@gmail.com> > >>>>> Acked-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlow...@linaro.org> > >>>> Please drop my Ack. I have never acked such patch for uboot. If I did, > >>>> it was by mistake - probably you CC-ed me for some reason. > >>>> > >>> > >>> Some explaination, uboot introduced the concept of upstream where they > >>> "import" linux patch for dts and dt-bindings. > >> > >> I expected OF_UPSTREAM to be taking the sources, not patches. > >> > >>> > >>> This and the other patch are the exact upstream patch with only the path > >>> changed so I keep all the patch commit message with tags and added the > >>> > >>> [ upstream commit ] thing. > >>> > >>> Hope Tom can better suggest how this should be done. You were CC > >>> probably because the git send-email included you as present in the > >>> different tags. > >> > >> Well, Ack is still not valid because I did not Ack exactly that change. > >> It does not matter for the ack, but for Reviewed-by it would matter, > >> because it is a statement (of oversight...). I cannot control what you > >> put into patches taken out of kernel, but at least do not Cc me on that. > > > > In specifics, yes, we should update doc/develop/devicetree/control.rst > > and maybe doc/develop/sending_patches.rst to use --suppress-cc=all for > > dts/upstream. > > > > But in general, what do you expect people to be doing with content from > > devicetree-rebasing? We're doing some direct cherry-picks in between > > merging of the tags. I think it would be weird to be dropping the tags > > and un-attributing peoples work. > > > I rather expected something like how kernel is importing dtc. You just > list the commits you get. If you want the full git history, then I would > expect simple git submodule. In both cases there will be no such patches > on the lists. > > For the Ack it does not matter, but I would feel uncomfortable if people > were sending stripped and modified patches with my Rb tag.
I guess I'm confused. Looking at https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/patch/20250314185941.27834-6-ansuels...@gmail.com/ we're doing the normal thing of havig "[ upstream commit <sha>]" after the imported log. When I merge the subtree and tag it indeed gives what you're expecting too. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
