linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] firmware: xilinx: Add zynqmp IOCTL API for device control

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:   Mon, 1 Oct 2018 10:26:59 -0700
From:   Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
To:     Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>
Cc:     Jolly Shah <JOLLYS@...inx.com>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
        ARM-SoC Maintainers <arm@...nel.org>,
        linux-clk <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
        Rajan Vaja <RAJANV@...inx.com>,
        Linux ARM Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] firmware: xilinx: Add zynqmp IOCTL API for device control

On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 6:17 AM Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 28.9.2018 23:12, Olof Johansson wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 10:15 AM Jolly Shah <JOLLYS@...inx.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Olof,
> >>
> >> Thanks for the review. Pushed v4 with suggested fixes. Let us know if series looks good and we can create pull request for same.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Jolly Shah
> >
> > I'm happy with this one, thanks for revising the patchset with the fixes.
> >
> > Feel free to add:
> >
> > Acked-by: Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
> >
> > to the patches.
>
> Just for clarification. I have checked driver/clk and patches should
> still go via Michael or Stephen.
> Firmware code is already in arm-soc tree that's why I would expect
> Michael/Stephen should review it and then it shouldn't be a problem to
> take this via arm-soc tree.
>
> Olof: Please correct me if I am wrong and you are happy to take it via
> arm-soc directly.

Honestly it might be easiest for you to prepare one branch and send to
all parties in case you have contents you expect to go on top, but
besides that I'd be fine with merging through either tree.


-Olof