linux-kernel - Re: [1/3] TDM: Add maxim ds26522 document to bindings

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, 8 Mar 2016 17:37:23 -0600
From:	Scott Wood <oss@...error.net>
To:	Zhao Qiang <qiang.zhao@....com>
Cc:	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, scottwood@...escale.com,
	Priyanka.Jain@...escale.com, robh+dt@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [1/3] TDM: Add maxim ds26522 document to bindings

On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 10:46:53AM +0800, Zhao Qiang wrote:
> Add maxim ds26522 document to
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/tdm/maxim,ds26522.txt
> 
> Signed-off-by: Zhao Qiang <qiang.zhao@....com>
> Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/tdm/maxim,ds26522.txt | 13 +++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/tdm/maxim,ds26522.txt
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/tdm/maxim,ds26522.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/tdm/maxim,ds26522.txt
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..3548c51
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/tdm/maxim,ds26522.txt
> @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
> +* Maxim (Dallas) DS26522 Octal T1/E1/J1 Transceiver
> +
> +Required properties:
> +- compatible: Should contain "maxim,ds26522".
> +- reg: SPI CS
> +- spi-max-frequency: SPI bus max frequency.
> +
> +Example:
> +	slic@2 {
> +		compatible = "maxim,ds26522";
> +		reg = <2>;
> +		spi-max-frequency = <2000000>;
> +	};

An almost identical file was added by you in commit
a109752ea6a55c3682b6ac9114a125c5ce7e5353

There is also overlap in the later patches of this set.

Why did you send this again?  What tree are you basing your patches on?

-Scott