Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: display: msm: sm6125-mdss: drop unneeded status from examples

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 26/07/2023 09:27, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 25/07/2023 13:46, Marijn Suijten wrote:
>> On 2023-07-25 12:16:10, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> Example DTS should not have 'status' property.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>  .../devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6125-mdss.yaml   | 6 ------
>>
>> This is not needed: it has already been corrected in v3 and v4 of the
>> respective series (among other changes) and the patches were only picked
>> to a preliminary (draft) pull to get an overview of the outstanding work
>> for this subsystem.  That branch happens to be included in regular -next
>> releases though.
>>
>> 6.6 drm/msm display pull: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/msm/-/merge_requests/69
>> v3: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20230718-sm6125-dpu-v3-0-6c5a56e99820@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
>> v4: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20230723-sm6125-dpu-v4-0-a3f287dd6c07@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> 
> What do you mean? The old code (one I am fixing) is in current next...
> 
> If this was fixed, why next gets some outdated branches of drm next?
> Each maintainers next tree is supposed to be fed into the next, without
> delays.
> 

Ah, I think I understood - some work in progress was applied to
work-in-progress branch of drm/msm and this somehow got pushed to
linux-next? How anyone is supposed to work on next branches if they are
outdated or have stuff known to be incomplete?

Best regards,
Krzysztof