On 25/07/2025 11:38, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On 7/25/25 00:21, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 24, 2025 at 05:13:03PM +0800, wenswang@xxxxxxxx wrote: >>> From: Wensheng Wang <wenswang@xxxxxxxx> >>> >>> Add support for MPS mp2869/mp2869a,mp29608/mp29608a,mp29612/mp29612a and >>> mp29816/mp29816a/mp29816b/mp29816c controller >>> >>> Acked-by: Rob Herring (Arm) <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Signed-off-by: Wensheng Wang <wenswang@xxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> V3 -> V4: >>> 1. split patches for MP2869,mp29608,mp29612,mp29816,mp29502 >>> 2. add description for vender specific registers >>> >>> V2 -> V3: >>> merge patches for MP2869,mp29608,mp29612,mp29816,mp29502 >> >> No one asked you to merge drivers. Look where comments appear. >> >> So again: merge the bindings, it's a churn to add one trivial device >> after another. >> > > I think that is what they did in this version of the series. There are Yeah, I wanted to merge bindings but they merged drivers to which you objects (rightfully). > two drivers for the various chips, one of them supporting multiple chips. > That makes sense if the supported chips are similar (and afaics that > is the case). This also could be two patchsets. But combining one patchset with two trivial binding changes is a churn. However my comment about squashing bindings is also trivial, so this should not be a reason for prolonged discussions or multiple resubmit, just in case. Best regards, Krzysztof
