linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] pinctrl: rockchip: codingstyle for pinctrl-rockchip

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: <1646119.L9t6MPyLfv@diego>
Date:   Sat, 12 Sep 2020 14:02:22 +0200
From:   Heiko Stübner <heiko@...ech.de>
To:     Jianqun Xu <jay.xu@...k-chips.com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc:     David Wu <david.wu@...k-chips.com>,
        Kever Yang <kever.yang@...k-chips.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..." <linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] pinctrl: rockchip: codingstyle for pinctrl-rockchip

Hi Linus,

Am Samstag, 12. September 2020, 13:27:44 CEST schrieb Linus Walleij:
> Jianqun, Heiko,
> 
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 9:14 AM Jianqun Xu <jay.xu@...k-chips.com> wrote:
> 
> > Do codingstyle for pinctrl-rockchip by spliting driver by SoC types.
> >
> > Convenienty for reviewing, the first patch only moving
> > pinctrl-rockchip.c from driver/pinctrl to driver/pinctrl/rockchip/ .
> >
> > Jianqun Xu (2):
> >   pinctrl: rockchip: new rockchip dir for pinctrl-rockchip
> >   pinctrl: rockchip: split rockchip pinctrl driver by SoC type
> 
> Why were these patches never applied? Is it my fault?

It's not your fault :-)

> I don't even have patch 2/2 in my mailbox, possibly it was
> too big!
> 
> Heiko if you're OK with this change can Jianqun just send a
> rebased version?

We agreed to split it into smaller chunks which I think is the 13-patch
series you mentioned elsewhere today. But I guess that fell through
the cracks in my review :-( .

So I guess we should do the current GKI thingy first to get that
module build and after that maybe Jianqun can find the time to rebase
the per-soc split on top of that.


Heiko