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:   Thu, 21 May 2020 20:14:04 +0800
From:   "Ramuthevar, Vadivel MuruganX" 
        <vadivel.muruganx.ramuthevar@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     robh@...nel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, vigneshr@...com,
        cheol.yong.kim@...el.com, qi-ming.wu@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] dt-bindings: spi: Add schema for Cadence QSPI
 Controller driver


Hi Mark,

On 21/5/2020 6:56 pm, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 10:18:26AM +0800, Ramuthevar, Vadivel MuruganX wrote:
>> On 20/5/2020 8:43 pm, Mark Brown wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 08:36:12PM +0800, Ramuthevar,Vadivel MuruganX wrote:
> 
>>>>    .../devicetree/bindings/mtd/cadence-quadspi.txt    |  67 -----------
>>>>    .../devicetree/bindings/spi/cdns,qspi-nor.yaml     | 133 +++++++++++++++++++++
> 
>>> The changelog says this is adding a new binding but the actual change is
>>> mostly a conversion to YAML.  Please split the additions out into a
>>> separate change, ideally doing that before the conversion since there is
>>> a backlog on review of YAML conversions.
> 
>> Initially was sending the only YAML file alone, then reviewers suggest to me
>> do this way so I did, next by split the patches like below...
> 
>> 1. remove the cadence-quadspi.txt (patch1)
>> 2. convert txt to YAML (patch2)
> 
> That doesn't address either of the issues.  The removal of the old
> bindings and addition of the YAML ones needs to be in a single patch
> doing that conversion.  What I'm suggesting should be done separately is
> whatever changes to the semantics of the bindings you are (according to
> your changelog) doing.
You mean semantics of the binding as a single patch you are suggesting 
me, right? , Thanks!

Regards
Vadivel

> 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists