linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 2/9] dt-bindings: ti-lmu: Remove LM3697

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, 3 Oct 2018 22:46:40 +0200
From:   Jacek Anaszewski <jacek.anaszewski@...il.com>
To:     Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Dan Murphy <dmurphy@...com>
Cc:     robh+dt@...nel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lee.jones@...aro.org,
        linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, linux-leds@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 2/9] dt-bindings: ti-lmu: Remove LM3697

On 10/03/2018 03:01 PM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Wed 2018-10-03 07:24:23, Dan Murphy wrote:
>> Hello
>>
>> On 10/02/2018 02:28 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
>>> On Fri 2018-09-28 13:29:47, Dan Murphy wrote:
>>>> Remove support for the LM3697 LED device
>>>> from the ti-lmu.  The LM3697 will be supported
>>>> via a stand alone LED driver.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Dan Murphy <dmurphy@...com>
>>>
>>> NAK, for reasons I explained before. Please add it to the patch so
>>> that it does not get applied by mistake. Ouch and AFAICT Rob was not
>>> happy with this either.
>>>
>>> Yes, you are creating new drivers, ok; but that does _not_ mean you
>>> should create new binding.
>>
>> I am copying my comment here on the review of this original binding for
>> records
>>
>> I found the review or at least the reference for the ti-lmu.txt binding.
>>
>> https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/764180/
>>
>> Does not appear that the binding was sent to the device tree mail list.
>> (Maybe that email list did not exist in Feb 2017).
> 
> Quick google shows:
> 
> https://lwn.net/Articles/666023/

This link refreshed my memory and allowed me to recall Milo's patch set
from the end of 2015, and the related discussion. I had an impression
that I had had some request regarding the bindings but there was no
follow-up.

I've googled that thread [0] and it proved I was right [1].

>From Milo's messages we can infer that there will be next
version of the patch set and it appeared but over a year later [2],
and without the leds-lm3633 driver and related bindings, and without
drivers/video/backlight/ti-lmu-backlight-core.c.

Patch set gets merged despite dangling DT references.

Dan, I propose you to resend the patch removing the bindings from
MFD, and explain the rationale in the patch below commit message
after "---" .

> Now can we stop this nonsense? If there is a problem with the binding,
> submit patches to fix the problem.

[0]
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1448521025-2796-1-git-send-email-milo.kim@ti.com/
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/56656468.8020300@samsung.com/
[2]
https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg1341860.html

-- 
Best regards,
Jacek Anaszewski