linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: n900: Include adp1653 device

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:	Wed, 27 Jan 2016 08:24:53 -0800
From:	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
To:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@...il.com>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
	Benoît Cousson <bcousson@...libre.com>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: n900: Include adp1653 device

* Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk> [160127 03:19]:
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 11:02:37AM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > In my opinion this patch is not support for new hardware. It just add
> > missing DT definition for one specific board for HW which was added to
> > linux kernel in v4.2-rc1 version. For me it looks like that needed DT
> > definition was forgotten...
> 
> Opinions differ, but ultimately it's up to whoever is responsible for
> accepting the patch, and in the case of ARM SoC based patches, the
> arm-soc maintainers.

Yeah. Sorry for long delay as discussed. I'm applying the $subject
patch finally into omap-for-v4.6/dt today.

We still have at least two fixes left to go that both affect also
n900. But at least I can now sanely test adding new stuff with a WIP
fix for the PM runtime regression.

> The arm-soc maintainers close their trees for development changes a
> few weeks before hand (a patch of mine which was acked etc by 7th
> December never made the 4.5 merge window either, and the alleged
> reason I've been told is because arm-soc was already closed by then).

Heh I too have some pending clock framework patches from December
that I did not repost yet as the maintainers notified that they
rather not take new stuff any longer for v4.5 before the holidays.

Regards,

Tony