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  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:   Tue, 26 Mar 2019 10:54:35 +0800
From:   Zhiyong Tao <zhiyong.tao@...iatek.com>
To:     Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
CC:     <linus.walleij@...aro.org>, <mark.rutland@....com>,
        <matthias.bgg@...il.com>, <sean.wang@...nel.org>,
        <srv_heupstream@...iatek.com>, <hui.liu@...iatek.com>,
        <eddie.huang@...iatek.com>, <chuanjia.liu@...iatek.com>,
        <biao.huang@...iatek.com>, <hongzhou.yang@...iatek.com>,
        <erin.lo@...iatek.com>, <sean.wang@...iatek.com>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] arm64: dts: mt8183: add pintcrl file

On Mon, 2019-03-25 at 14:30 -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 08:23:00PM +0800, Zhiyong Tao wrote:
> > This patch adds pinctrl file for mt8183.
> 
> Still has a typo in the subject.

==>we will change it in next version
> 
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Zhiyong Tao <zhiyong.tao@...iatek.com>
> > ---
> >  arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8183-pinfunc.h | 1120 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 1120 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8183-pinfunc.h
> 
> Add acks/reviewed-bys when posting new versions. This should also be 
> called v8 even though a different person sent it.

==>we will add acks/reviewed-bys when posting new versions in nxet
version.
This patch is based on "https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10814251/".
If it is based on the patch
"https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10814251/", it should called v8.
But I send this patch, we call it v3. Because it it is based on the
patch "https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10836969/".

In these v3 patches, we send 4 patches. So we should call 1/4,2/4,3/4 as
v9 in next patch, and call 4/4 patch as v5. is it right?

Thanks.
> 
> Rob
> 


Powered by blists - more mailing lists