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

Date:   Tue, 10 Jan 2017 12:32:54 +0100
From:   Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>
To:     Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>
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 10/01/2017 at 12:21:42 +0100, Peter Rosin wrote :
> 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.
> 

There is public shaming for maintainers taking patches without a commit
message, that's enough for me to require a commit message ;)

https://lwn.net/Articles/560392/

> >>> 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 :-)
> 

Well, you can let it there, I was just not sure whether you were
expecting to see patches or just trying to make checkpatch happy. As
said, I'm fine with it.

> >>>> +&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

-- 
Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com