linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 09/11] dt-bindings: power: rockchip: Convert to json-schema

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: <20210326200626.GA3776228@robh.at.kernel.org>
Date:   Fri, 26 Mar 2021 14:06:26 -0600
From:   Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To:     Elaine Zhang <zhangqing@...k-chips.com>
Cc:     heiko@...ech.de, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        cl@...k-chips.com, huangtao@...k-chips.com,
        kever.yang@...k-chips.com, tony.xie@...k-chips.com,
        finley.xiao@...k-chips.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 09/11] dt-bindings: power: rockchip: Convert to
 json-schema

On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 06:30:36PM +0800, Elaine Zhang wrote:
> Convert the soc/rockchip/power_domain.txt binding document to
> json-schema and move to the power bindings directory.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Elaine Zhang <zhangqing@...k-chips.com>
> From: Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balletbo@...labora.com>
> Link:https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-rockchip/patch/20210225102643.653095-1-enric.balletbo@collabora.com/
> ---
>  .../power/rockchip,power-controller.yaml      | 291 ++++++++++++++++++
>  .../bindings/soc/rockchip/power_domain.txt    | 136 --------
>  2 files changed, 291 insertions(+), 136 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/rockchip,power-controller.yaml
>  delete mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/rockchip/power_domain.txt

My review checks tell me I already reviewed this and IIRC that was 
pointed out to you in the last version. Am I supposed to review the 
whole thing again or is it unchanged or ???. I have no idea with no 
version history.

As there are other issues pointed out, I'm going with 'wait for the next 
version'.

Rob