linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 0/5] Add initial support for ATC260x PMICs

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:   Mon, 22 Feb 2021 15:30:16 +0000
From:   Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
To:     Cristian Ciocaltea <cristian.ciocaltea@...il.com>
Cc:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
        Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
        Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Andreas Färber <afaerber@...e.de>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        linux-actions@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 0/5] Add initial support for ATC260x PMICs

On Mon, 22 Feb 2021, Cristian Ciocaltea wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 09:02:47AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Sun, 21 Feb 2021, Cristian Ciocaltea wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi Lee,
> > > 
> > > I have just noticed your mfd-next tag for 5.12 doesn't include the
> > > support for the ATC260x PMICs.
> > > 
> > > I assumed the patchset is ready for merging.. Did I miss something?
> > 
> > The MFD driver needs another review.
> > 
> > For some reason, this didn't register on my TODO list.
> 
> You have already tagged v6 with 'Acked-for-MFD-by: Lee Jones
> <lee.jones@...aro.org>':
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210125142558.GA4903@dell/
> 
> I have submitted v7 to drop the patches that had been already picked up,
> as previously agreed, but otherwise there are no other changes.
> 
> That is why I didn't expect another round of review..

I see what's happened.  You forgot to:

  "apply this as-is to your sign-off block"

... as requested, which made me think it needs a subsequent review.

> > In general, if you don't receive a review within ~2 weeks of posting
> > (and the merge window is not open), you should consider it lost and
> > submit a [RESEND].

Due to the fragility of email reviews, this is still very important.

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Senior Technical Lead - Developer Services
Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog