linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] pwm: add support for ChromeOS EC PWM

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: <20160718184532.GA131404@google.com>
Date:	Mon, 18 Jul 2016 11:45:33 -0700
From:	Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
To:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc:	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
	Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
	linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>,
	Stephen Barber <smbarber@...omium.org>,
	Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>,
	Benson Leung <bleung@...omium.org>,
	Enric Balletbo <enric.balletbo@...labora.co.uk>,
	Randall Spangler <rspangler@...omium.org>,
	Shawn Nematbakhsh <shawnn@...omium.org>,
	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
	Todd Broch <tbroch@...omium.org>,
	Gwendal Grignou <gwendal@...omium.org>,
	Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@...labora.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] pwm: add support for ChromeOS EC PWM

On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 09:49:28AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jul 2016, Brian Norris wrote:
> > As this touches MFD (sort of), drivers/platform/chrome/, and drivers/pwm/, I'm
> > still not sure who it should all go through: Lee, Thierry, or Olof?
> 
> I usually take this type of submission through the MFD tree, although
> it's too late in the day to make it into v4.8.
> 
> Which Acks are you missing?

I think I was only missing Thierry's. If he's planning to take it
through his tree, then that's fine. It's also fine if it waits for 4.9,
if that helps, although I agree it has practically zero chances of
regressions.

But most importantly, I think various parties would like patch 1, so if
it doesn't make 4.8-rc1, then it's probably important it makes it into a
branch others can pull from if necessary.

Regards,
Brian