linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 00/15] Add support for OLPC XO 1.75 Embedded Controller

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: <CAHp75Ve2RZqf71tapmGQpZ1YtuKmEHe33k18k9Tg-7RExWQY8w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 10 Jan 2019 12:08:22 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Lubomir Rintel <lkundrak@...sk>
Cc:     Andy Shevchenko <andy@...radead.org>,
        Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>,
        Platform Driver <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        James Cameron <quozl@...top.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
        "maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@...nel.org>,
        linux-arm Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/15] Add support for OLPC XO 1.75 Embedded Controller

On Wed, Jan 9, 2019 at 6:37 PM Lubomir Rintel <lkundrak@...sk> wrote:
> On Wed, 2019-01-09 at 13:15 +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 7:58 PM Lubomir Rintel <lkundrak@...sk> wrote:

> > > Also, the 01/15 patch has been added to allow the module to provide
> > > a
> > > reboot handler. Patch 15/15 depends on it.
> >
> > Isn't it a quite big distance between provider and consumer?
> > Especially taking into consideration concerns about patch 1 which
> > blocks the series.
> > Perhaps you may drop it as a patch 1 and do something on top of patch
> > 15 as feature extension?
>
> Yes, that is a good idea. I'll do so when I submit a new version of the
> set (in few days' time).
>
> I think the battery part can be split from the EC part too. Would that
> be a good idea to send them as separate patch sets next time?

Yes, any independent porions can be send independently. It would speed
up the review and applying process.

> It seems
> to me now that they probably ought to end up going in via different
> trees (linux-power-supply vs linux-platform-drivers-x86).

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko