linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/14] arm64: dts: meson-axg: add audio support

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]

Date:   Wed, 25 Jul 2018 23:26:27 +0200
From:   Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com>
To:     jbrunet@...libre.com
Cc:     khilman@...libre.com, carlo@...one.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, p.zabel@...gutronix.de,
        linux-amlogic@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/14] arm64: dts: meson-axg: add audio support

Hi Jerome,

On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 11:19 PM <jbrunet@...libre.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2018-07-25 at 21:11 +0200, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> > nit-pick: one patch uses "arm64: dts: meson-axg: s400" in the subject
> > while other patches that are touching the s400 board aren't
> > if you have to re-send this series: can you please use the "arm64:
> > dts: meson-axg: s400:" prefix for all patches touching the s400 board?
>
> hum, do we really have such rule, or do you think we should add one ?
looking at the git history in arch/arm64/boot/dts/amlogic: it seems
that we don't have a rule yet, even though some (some of
your's/Neil's/my) patches were using that naming schema in the past

> Kevin, do you have opinion ?
>
> Not that I really mind either way, but prefixes rules are usually there to help
> maintainer filter the patches. Will such rule help in any way ?
maybe it's just a problem of a false initial impression
I read "arm64: dts: meson-axg: add usb power regulator" in the
cover-letter and came to the conclusion that this patch must be wrong
since meson-axg.dtsi should not have any regulators (unless they're
built into the SoC). only when looking at the patch itself I realized
that it's fine because it patches the s400.dts


Regards
Martin