linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] mtd: ofpart: update devicetree binding specification

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 27 Oct 2015 19:45:57 -0500
From:	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
To:	Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>
Cc:	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>,
	Michal Suchanek <hramrach@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] mtd: ofpart: update devicetree binding specification

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 5:50 PM, Brian Norris
<computersforpeace@...il.com> wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
> Thanks for the review.
>
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 11:35:24PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Brian Norris
>> <computersforpeace@...il.com> wrote:
>> > Hi DT maintainers,
>> >
>> > It's a bit hypocritical of me, since I've been a slow reviewer as well,
>> > but... can we get some review on this one? Usually, I'm comfortable
>> > taking driver DT bindings without your review, but this one is a bit
>> > more generic and is more far-reaching than the average driver.
>>
>> Sorry, missed this one. This would be a good one to send to
>> devicetree-spec to BTW.
>
> I'm not very familiar with that list. With the intention of getting into
> an ePAPR (or similar) spec? Or just for additional review? If the
> former, would you suggest codifying both the old and the new, or just
> the new?

I would say it is for anything not driver specific. It was created to
separate out the driver binding firehose from the common bindings and
get more non-Linux participation on those. Perhaps it was poorly
named. I want to improve the split in docs so the appropriate list is
used.

Sending to both devicetree and devicetree-spec is fine.

Rob
--
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/