linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] STM32F4 Add RTC & QSPI clocks

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 19 Oct 2016 13:29:04 -0700
From:   Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
To:     Gabriel Fernandez <gabriel.fernandez@...com>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
        Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...com>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Nicolas Pitre <nico@...aro.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        daniel.thompson@...aro.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, ludovic.barre@...com,
        olivier.bideau@...com, amelie.delaunay@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] STM32F4 Add RTC & QSPI clocks

On 10/19, Gabriel Fernandez wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
> 
> 
> On 10/19/2016 01:51 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> >On 10/14, gabriel.fernandez@...com wrote:
> >>Gabriel Fernandez (6):
> >>   clk: stm32f4: Add LSI & LSE clocks
> >>   ARM: dts: stm32f429: add LSI and LSE clocks
> >>   arm: stmf32: Enable SYSCON
> >>   clk: stm32f4: Add RTC clock
> >>   clk: stm32f469: Add QSPI clock
> >>   ARM: dts: stm32f429: Add QSPI clock
> >Can the clk patches be picked without causing problems for
> >existing dt changes? Do you want an ack from clk maintainers
> >instead of us picking the clk patches up? The series has
> >intermingled clk and dts changes so I'm confused.
> >
> 
> Thanks for reviewing.
> 
> Normally DT patches will be taken by STM32 maintainer, but yes there
> is a dependency between patch 1 & 2, so if you push the patch 1 into
> clk-next tree you have to take also patch 2.

Let's break the dependency by making the required property
optional or key off a different compatible string. As it stands
right now applying patch 1 will cause things to break until the
second patch lands which is not great.

> 
> You have to be synchronized with Alexandre Torgue.
> 
> 

I'd prefer zero synchronization. Please just send the clk patches
the next time and leave the stuff for arm-soc out of the patch
series. Thanks.

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project