linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] edac: altera: Add SDRAM EDAC support for CycloneV/ArriaV

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: <20140408154017.GF11876@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
Date:	Tue, 8 Apr 2014 16:40:17 +0100
From:	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:	Thor Thayer <tthayer@...era.com>,
	"robherring2@...il.com" <robherring2@...il.com>,
	"dougthompson@...ssion.com" <dougthompson@...ssion.com>,
	"grant.likely@...aro.org" <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	Pawel Moll <Pawel.Moll@....com>,
	"ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk" <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	"galak@...eaurora.org" <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	"rob@...dley.net" <rob@...dley.net>,
	"linux@....linux.org.uk" <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	"dinguyen@...era.com" <dinguyen@...era.com>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-edac@...r.kernel.org" <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] edac: altera: Add SDRAM EDAC support for
 CycloneV/ArriaV

On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 04:24:06PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 08:57:39AM -0500, Thor Thayer wrote:
> > Yes, Altera has a group specifically supporting Linux drivers on the
> > Altera SoCs.
> 
> Then please add MAINTAINERS file entry for this EDAC driver so that
> people can send issues/reports to that group.
> 
> > I was told that the device tree additions should be separate patches
> > in a series since the device tree additions go to a separate group for
> > approval.
> 
> Well, the EDAC driver depends on the devicetree stuff, right? If so,
> they should go together.

The patches should be in the same series, but for review purposes it's
nicer if the bindings are separate patches from the code within that
series.

I usually look at the drivers implementing bindings and prefer to be
Cc'd on the whole series, with both the binding and driver.

Cheers,
Mark.
--
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/