linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] dt-bindings: w1: document generic onewire 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAL_JsqL10WT5AK37_8o3M_=UiLx_thcm1W3UNz2qBaB5dRo8XA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 20 Jul 2018 09:10:36 -0600
From:   Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To:     Daniel Mack <daniel@...que.org>
Cc:     zbr@...emap.net, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        szabolcs.gyurko@....hu, Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:THERMAL" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@...e.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] dt-bindings: w1: document generic onewire bindings

On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 6:40 AM Daniel Mack <daniel@...que.org> wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, July 11, 2018 05:01 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 06, 2018 at 07:35:48AM +0200, Daniel Mack wrote:
> >> This patch adds a generic w1 bindings document that describes how w1
> >> slave deviceses are grouped under master nodes. It also augments the
> >> existing w1-gpio.txt document a bit.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Daniel Mack <daniel@...que.org>
> >> ---
> >>   .../devicetree/bindings/w1/w1-gpio.txt        | 11 +++++---
> >>   Documentation/devicetree/bindings/w1/w1.txt   | 25 +++++++++++++++++++
> >>   2 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >>   create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/w1/w1.txt
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
> >
> > Note that this will conflict with a unit-address fix that I have queued
> > up for 4.18 (will send this week).
>
> How would we best handle this? Sebastian, are you going to apply this
> series, and add a note to the PR for 4.19 on how to resolve the conflict?

Either 4.18-rc6 or my devicetree-fixes-for-4.18 tag (based on rc1) can
be pulled in. Or just note the conflict. It is trivial enough.

Rob