Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 00/27] Add support for QMC HDLC, framer infrastructure and PEF2256 framer

From: Herve Codina <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 08:43:30 +0100

Hi Mark, Jakub, Qiang, Li,

On Mon, 20 Nov 2023 13:30:08 +0000
Mark Brown <[email-masked]> wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 04:47:46PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 15:39:36 +0100 Herve Codina wrote:  
> > >    - Removed Patches 6, 7 and 8 (patches applied)
> > > 
> > >    - Patches 7, 20, 21, 23 (patches 10, 23, 24, 26 in v8)
> > >      Add 'Acked-by: Jakub Kicinski <[email-masked]>'  
> 
> > I thought someone (Mark?) asked for the networking stuff to be put 
> > on a branch. If that's still the preference - is it possible to factor
> > these out as a standalone series, too?  Will they build on their own?  
> 
> Yes, can we *please* at least get the generic non-driver bits of this
> series moving - they seem uncontroversial as far as I can see and are a
> tiny portion of the overall 20 patches.  Patches 21-23 look like they
> can go on a branch in the net tree?

Patch 21 is the framer infrastructure.
Patches 22-25 are the driver for the PEF2256 framer.
Note that patch 24 is the pinmux part of the framer and, IHMO, can be
taken too.
Patch 23 need to be fixed (kernel test robot). The fix will be quite
minor (depends on HAS_IOMEM on the Kconfig file).

For the SoC part (QUICC ENGINE QMC and TSA), what will be the plan ? 
Qiang, Li, any opinion ?

I plan to send the v10 with the patch 23 fixed.
Based on that v10, some patches (21 to 25 at least) could be applied and
I will remove them for the future v11.
I think it will be easier to follow if I iterate on the series removing
patches as soon as they are applied.

Of course, please, let me know if this is not the right way to do.

Best regards,
Hervé