linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/7] pinctrl: Fixes for AST2600 support

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, 16 Oct 2019 22:11:48 +1030
From:   "Andrew Jeffery" <andrew@...id.au>
To:     "Linus Walleij" <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc:     "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Rob Herring" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        "Mark Rutland" <mark.rutland@....com>,
        "Joel Stanley" <joel@....id.au>,
        linux-aspeed <linux-aspeed@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Linux ARM" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Johnny Huang" <johnny_huang@...eedtech.com>,
        "Ryan Chen" <ryanchen.aspeed@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] pinctrl: Fixes for AST2600 support



On Wed, 16 Oct 2019, at 21:49, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 6:41 AM Andrew Jeffery <andrew@...id.au> wrote:
> 
> > This series resolves several issues found in testing by Johnny Huang from
> > ASPEED, who also contributed the patches to fix them. We'll have more patches
> > from him in the near future (which I'm pretty happy about).
> >
> > The major issue resolved is the way I grouped the eMMC pins. What I had was
> > ugly and I want to get rid of it before the binding is solidified with the 5.4
> > release.
> 
> Should some of these go in with fixes? All of them? Or just some?
> I applied them to devel right now (for v5.5).

I was hoping to get them into the 5.4 fixes branch: I consider them all fixes - the rework of the eMMC pin groups and functions is a fix for the binding. The rest are fixes for the driver itself. My preference is that they get into a release sooner rather than later.

It's there something that makes you think they shouldn't be merged as fixes for 5.4?

> 
> > The remaining fixes are minor issues that stem from lack of documentation or
> > understanding on my part, and at least one brain-fart.
> 
> Do they need to go in to v5.4 or not?
> 
> I need a shortlist of anything that should go into v5.4 if anything.

IMO all of them should go into 5.4, as above. It's there something I can do in the future to communicate this better? Explicit shortlist in the cover letter? Fixes tags on the relevant patches? Keen to make things easier/more obvious if I can.

Cheers,

Andrew