linux-kernel - Re: Can someone Ack and queue a patch for RTC subsytem?

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]

Message-ID: <20131220005758.GA2609@titan.lakedaemon.net>
Date:	Thu, 19 Dec 2013 19:57:58 -0500
From:	Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>
To:	Arnaud Ebalard <arno@...isbad.org>
Cc:	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	rtc-linux@...glegroups.com, Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@...ertech.it>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
	Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
	Peter Huewe <peter.huewe@...ineon.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thierry Reding <treding@...dia.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: Can someone Ack and queue a patch for RTC subsytem?

On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 06:46:18PM +0100, Arnaud Ebalard wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net> writes:
> 
> > On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 05:34:09PM +0100, Arnaud Ebalard wrote:
> >> I have a very simple driver (support for reading and setting the time)
> >> for a RTC chip (Intersil ISL 12057) but cannot find anyone to get it
> >> Acked and queued for v3.14. In v3.14, there should be at least three
> >> users of the driver (ReadyNAS 102, 104 and 2120) if I meet -rc5 cutoff
> >> for associated .dts changes.
> >
> > The -rc5 cutoff isn't a hard line.  It's also mvebu-specific.  eg, We
> > need things _posted_ a week or so before arm-soc's cutoff of -rc6 so we
> > have time to get the pull request in.  If it needs to go through
> > mvebu/arm-soc, once it's posted, you're good.
> 
> I understand. But I guess you will not (for valid reason) accept .dts
> changes to reference a rtc driver that is not on good track towards
> -next. This is the issue I try and solve.

Just a subtle note here.  If the binding is stabilized, I don't mind
taking the dts changes.  However, if we have time, I prefer to wait for
the whole series to be hashed out.  You never know which resolutions
will end up revisiting the bindings you thought were good. :)

So, it's technically not a requirement for the whole driver to be
settled, but it is a good idea.

thx,

Jason.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/