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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Tue, 19 Feb 2019 10:02:08 +0800
From:   Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...aro.org>
To:     Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
        Orson Zhai <orsonzhai@...il.com>,
        Chunyan Zhang <zhang.lyra@...il.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        DTML <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] gpio: sprd: Change to use SoC compatible string

On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 04:07, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 12:55:19PM +0800, Baolin Wang wrote:
> > Change to use SoC compatible string instead of wildcard string.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...aro.org>
> > ---
> > Changes from v1:
> >  - None.
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpio/gpio-pmic-eic-sprd.c |    2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-pmic-eic-sprd.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-pmic-eic-sprd.c
> > index ac573da..24228cf 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-pmic-eic-sprd.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-pmic-eic-sprd.c
> > @@ -364,7 +364,7 @@ static int sprd_pmic_eic_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >  }
> >
> >  static const struct of_device_id sprd_pmic_eic_of_match[] = {
> > -     { .compatible = "sprd,sc27xx-eic", },
> > +     { .compatible = "sprd,sc2731-eic", },
>
> You need to keep the old one if you care about backwards compatibility.
> If you don't then state why in the commit message.
>

As we discussed before, our dts and drivers development are still in
progress, and we always recompile and ship device trees at the same
time as we compile and ship the kernel, so we do not need care about
backwards compatibility.

Yes, I will add the explanation in the commit message. Thanks.

-- 
Baolin Wang
Best Regards

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ