[RESEND] spi: sh-msiof: Document R-Car D3 support

Document support for the MSIOF module in the Renesas D3 (r8a77995) SoC.

No driver update is needed.

Signed-off-by: Ulrich Hecht <uli+renesas@fpond.eu>
Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms+renesas@verge.net.au>
Reviewed-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>
---
This patch fell by the wayside, probably because I forgot to cc devicetree.

CU
Uli


 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/sh-msiof.txt | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 11:12:31AM +0200, Ulrich Hecht wrote:
> Document support for the MSIOF module in the Renesas D3 (r8a77995) SoC.
> 
> No driver update is needed.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ulrich Hecht <uli+renesas@fpond.eu>
> Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms+renesas@verge.net.au>
> Reviewed-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>

Reviewed-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>

> ---
> This patch fell by the wayside, probably because I forgot to cc devicetree.

Yeah, this is good practice. Yet, I'd think this goes upstream via the
SPI tree? Ccing Mark, he prefers to be Cced explicitly.

On Mon, Sep 03, 2018 at 11:28:19AM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 11:12:31AM +0200, Ulrich Hecht wrote:

> > This patch fell by the wayside, probably because I forgot to cc devicetree.

> Yeah, this is good practice. Yet, I'd think this goes upstream via the
> SPI tree? Ccing Mark, he prefers to be Cced explicitly.

Yes, if I don't get sent a copy of patches I'm not going to see them:

As documented in SubmittingPatches please send patches to the 
maintainers for the code you would like to change.  The normal kernel
workflow is that people apply patches from their inboxes, if they aren't
copied they are likely to not see the patch at all and it is much more
difficult to apply patches.

On Mon, Sep 03, 2018 at 12:02:19PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 03, 2018 at 11:28:19AM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 11:12:31AM +0200, Ulrich Hecht wrote:
> 
> > > This patch fell by the wayside, probably because I forgot to cc devicetree.
> 
> > Yeah, this is good practice. Yet, I'd think this goes upstream via the
> > SPI tree? Ccing Mark, he prefers to be Cced explicitly.
> 
> Yes, if I don't get sent a copy of patches I'm not going to see them:
> 
> As documented in SubmittingPatches please send patches to the 
> maintainers for the code you would like to change.  The normal kernel
> workflow is that people apply patches from their inboxes, if they aren't
> copied they are likely to not see the patch at all and it is much more
> difficult to apply patches.

Uli, can you resend?

> On September 4, 2018 at 9:20 AM Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de> wrote:
> 
> 
> On Mon, Sep 03, 2018 at 12:02:19PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 03, 2018 at 11:28:19AM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > > On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 11:12:31AM +0200, Ulrich Hecht wrote:
> > 
> > > > This patch fell by the wayside, probably because I forgot to cc devicetree.
> > 
> > > Yeah, this is good practice. Yet, I'd think this goes upstream via the
> > > SPI tree? Ccing Mark, he prefers to be Cced explicitly.
> > 
> > Yes, if I don't get sent a copy of patches I'm not going to see them:
> > 
> > As documented in SubmittingPatches please send patches to the 
> > maintainers for the code you would like to change.  The normal kernel
> > workflow is that people apply patches from their inboxes, if they aren't
> > copied they are likely to not see the patch at all and it is much more
> > difficult to apply patches.
> 
> Uli, can you resend?

Geert has already done so, together with the corresponding change for E3.

CU
Uli