Hello Mani,
On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 10:33:59AM +0100, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
>
> On Sun, 11 May 2025 00:07:07 +0800, Hans Zhang wrote:
> > 1. PCI: dwc: Standardize link status check to return bool.
> > 2. PCI: mobiveil: Refactor link status check.
> > 3. PCI: cadence: Simplify j721e link status check.
> >
>
> Applied, thanks!
>
> [1/3] PCI: dwc: Standardize link status check to return bool
> commit: f46bfb1d3c6a601caad90eb3c11a1e1e17cccb1a
> [2/3] PCI: mobiveil: Refactor link status check
> commit: 0a9d6a3d0fd1650b9ee00bc8150828e19cadaf23
> [3/3] PCI: cadence: Simplify j721e link status check
> commit: 1a176b25f5d6f00c6c44729c006379b9a6dbc703
>
This was all applied to the dw-rockchip branch.
Was that intentional?
My guess is that perhaps you thought that
"PCI: dwc: Standardize link status check to return bool"
was going to conflict with Hans's other commit:
5e5a3bf48eed ("PCI: dw-rockchip: Use rockchip_pcie_link_up() to check link
up instead of open coding")
but at least from looking at the diff, they don't seem to touch the same
lines, but perhaps you got a conflict anyway?
mobiveil and cadence patches seem unrelated to dw-rockchip
(unrelated to DWC even).
If it was intentional, all is good, but perhaps the branch
should have a more generic name, rather than dw-rockchip,
especially now when the reset-slot and qcom-reset slot patches
are also on the same branch.
Kind regards,
Niklas
