linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] ARM: dts: at91: add devicetree for the Axentia TSE-850

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: <81d5b553-38db-5137-2eac-145cb2f76578@axentia.se>
Date:   Tue, 10 Jan 2017 12:21:42 +0100
From:   Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>
To:     Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>,
        Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard <plagnioj@...osoft.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] ARM: dts: at91: add devicetree for the Axentia
 TSE-850

On 2017-01-10 11:42, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> On 10/01/2017 at 10:52:56 +0100, Peter Rosin wrote :
>> On 2017-01-10 10:29, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> This needs a commit message, please add one.
>>
>> There's not all that much to say, but ok, I'll add something.
>>
> 
> It doesn't have to be long but it has to be present.

Does it really? There are quite a few examples to contradict that,
and checkpatch doesn't complain. That's no proof of course...

As I said, I'll add something.

>>> On 10/01/2017 at 09:08:51 +0100, Peter Rosin wrote :
>> There's also the benefit of the increased chances of me getting
>> notified of changes. I don't mind...
>>
> 
> Do you expect changes coming from third parties? I'm fine with it
> anyway.

Ok, I'll remember this and blame you for everything :-)

>>>> +&main {
>>>> +	clock-frequency = <12000000>;
>>>> +};
>>>> +
>>>
>>> I don't think this is needed
>>>
>>>
>>
>> "this"? The &main frequency, or all of them?
>>
> 
> I meant just main

Ok, I'll test with that change and then resend. Thanks!

Cheers,
peda