Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 1 Oct 2022 11:57:55 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/3] arm64: dts: qcom: sdm630: fix UART1 pin bias | From | Krzysztof Kozlowski <> |
| |
On 30/09/2022 22:19, Doug Anderson wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 11:22 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski > <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> wrote: >> >> There is no "bias-no-pull" property. Assume intentions were disabling >> bias. >> >> Fixes: b190fb010664 ("arm64: dts: qcom: sdm630: Add sdm630 dts file") >> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> >> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> >> >> --- >> >> Not tested on hardware. >> --- >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm630.dtsi | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > This does change behavior and has the potential to break someone. > Thus, without a bug report or someone to give a tested-by I'm at least > moderately worried about this going to stable@
Indeed. I can drop Cc-stable, but AUTOSEL can still pick it up because of Fixes tag. Fixes tag is here important to indicate we are having a bug before.
> > I would also note that convention on Qualcomm SoCs that I've worked on > was that bias shouldn't be specified in the SoC dtsi file and should > be left to board files. This is talked a bit about in a previous email > thread [1].
Uh, that makes a lot of sense. It is almost always a property of a board.
> > That being said, it does look like this was the intention of the > original commit, so thus: > > Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
Thanks.
I can also drop the property entirely to match existing behavior (not the intention).
> > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAD=FV=VUL4GmjaibAMhKNdpEso_Hg_R=XeMaqah1LSj_9-Ce4Q@mail.gmail.com/
Best regards, Krzysztof
| |