linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/6] Documentation: DT: Consolidate SP805 binding docs

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: <42b856bf-2dc1-f69b-44e1-f5a04715f673@broadcom.com>
Date:   Thu, 28 Jun 2018 16:50:57 -0700
From:   Ray Jui <ray.jui@...adcom.com>
To:     Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
        linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        BCM Kernel Feedback <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/6] Documentation: DT: Consolidate SP805 binding docs

Hi Guenter/Florian,

On 6/27/2018 11:55 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 11:47:21AM -0700, Ray Jui wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 6/27/2018 11:42 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 11:38:48AM -0700, Ray Jui wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 6/27/2018 11:33 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 10:39:16AM -0700, Ray Jui wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Guenter/Rob,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kindly let me know how you want to proceed with this?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> If I recall correctly, the patch series does not add a new problem
>>>>> but merely exposes one. Is my recollection correct ? If so, maybe
>>>>> we should just add a note somewhere indicating what might be wrong
>>>>> and otherwise apply the series.
>>>>>
>>>>> Does this make sense ?
>>>>
>>>> Yes this makes a lot of sense to me. This patch series exposes potential
>>>> problems in some SoCs that they might not be feeding the correct clock into
>>>> WDT, at least based on clock names from their DT entries.
>>>>
>>>> This patch series does not change/affect how SP805 works on those systems.
>>>>
>>>> Where should the note be added?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I would suggest to add a note into the driver where the clock is used,
>>> with the details discussed here.
>>
>> I assume you meant adding the notes to the SP805 driver where the clock is
>> used.
>>
>> If so, I think that makes sense. That notes deserves its own patch because
>> it really has nothing to do with any of the change in this patch series.
>>
>> Do you want me to 1) embed that patch into this patch series and send out
>> v5; or 2) leave the patch series as it is and send out a separate patch to
>> add the notes to the driver?
>>
> 2) is fine. I don't have the series here right now; if I recall correctly
> all patches in the series are all marked as Reviewed-by: and/or Acked-by:.
> If so, I'll apply them to my tree tonight, or at least the ones that will
> go in through the watchdog tree.
> 
> Guenter
> 

Guenter, please let us know once you take the first 4 patches.

Florian, could you please help with the last 2, once Guenter confirmed 
the first 4 are merged.

Thanks!

Ray