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, 13 Dec 2023 20:37:50 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <>
To: Ninad Palsule <>,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 8/8] ARM: dts: aspeed: System1: PS, sensor and more

On 13/12/2023 20:02, Ninad Palsule wrote:
> Hello Krzysztof,
> On 12/12/23 14:26, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 12/12/2023 17:40, Ninad Palsule wrote:
>>> This drop adds following devices in the device tree.
>>> - Power supplies
>>> - Humidity, pressure and temperature sensors.
>>> - Trusted platform module(TPM) chip
>>> Tested:
>>>      This board is tested using the simics simulator.
>>> Signed-off-by: Ninad Palsule <>
>>> ---
>> Don't mix DTS with drivers. DTS and drivers go via different subsystems
>> and cannot have dependencies, so why DTS is patch #6, then driver #7 and
>> now again DTS #7?
> There is a dependency on driver code as patch #8 uses the compatibility 
> string added in driver patch #7.  I have now moved driver patch at the 
> start. Is that ok? OR you are suggesting something else?

First, there is no dependency. Second, except confusing order anyway DTS
will go via separate trees. Third, again, there is no dependency. If
there is, your patchset is broken and this needs to be fixed. Although I
don't understand how new hardware can depend on driver... it's really odd.

Best regards,

Powered by blists - more mailing lists