linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] arm64: dts: Add Unisoc's SC9863A SoC 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAAfSe-tDDdCix3=C0-BARqeBCMDqM7XUCc_S5kZTEswtK5-ZvA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 17 Jan 2020 16:22:27 +0800
From:   Chunyan Zhang <zhang.lyra@...il.com>
To:     Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
Cc:     SoC Team <soc@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        DTML <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Orson Zhai <orsonzhai@...il.com>,
        Baolin Wang <baolin.wang7@...il.com>,
        Chunyan Zhang <chunyan.zhang@...soc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] arm64: dts: Add Unisoc's SC9863A SoC support

On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 at 08:57, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 4:56 PM Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 12, 2020 at 5:44 PM Chunyan Zhang <zhang.lyra@...il.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, 11 Jan 2020 at 01:41, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 10:38 PM Chunyan Zhang <zhang.lyra@...il.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > From: Chunyan Zhang <chunyan.zhang@...soc.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > Add basic DT to support Unisoc's SC9863A, with this patch,
> > > > > the board sp9863a-1h10 can run into console.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Chunyan Zhang <chunyan.zhang@...soc.com>
> > > >
> > > > You reposting a patch that we have already applied, and there's also
> > > > no changelog for it in the description.
> > >
> > > Oh, I have to explain a bit.
> > >
> > > I was expecting an email which inform me that the patch was got merged.
> > > That's the reason I resent this patchset.
> >
> > Ah, yes -- me too. This was a combination of two things:
> >
> > 1) The patch was originally sent to arm@...nel.org, not soc@...nel.org
> > 2) I bounced it to there to apply it using PatchWork
> >
> > ... but, it seems that the bot won't reply to patches that have been
> > bounced, only those who were originally sent there.
> >
> > In this case, I should have made a manual reply -- I've gotten too
> > used to the bot and relied on it doing it.
> >
> > > About the changelog, this new patchset actually had a cover-letter[1]
> > > in which I documented a little changes (which was not important now).
> >
> > Not sure why, but I seem to have missed it. Maybe because it was 3
> > patches on v5, and I didn't notice that one was now a cover letter.
> > Anyway, all good.
> >
> > I'll also apply 1/2 shortly.
>
> I'm ahead of myself, it's already applied as well.
>

Thank you very much!
Chunyan


FYI:
The patchset v5 seems also NOT sent to arm@...nel.org, it was
accurately sent to soc@...nel.org :-)
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/cover/1214863/