linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] arm: dts: mt8135: Move pinfunc to include/dt-bindings/pinctrl

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:   Wed, 11 Aug 2021 10:48:51 +0200
From:   Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:     Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>
Cc:     Hsin-Yi Wang <hsinyi@...omium.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Enric Balletbo Serra <eballetbo@...il.com>,
        Sean Wang <sean.wang@...nel.org>,
        Andy Teng <andy.teng@...iatek.com>,
        "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support" 
        <linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] arm: dts: mt8135: Move pinfunc to include/dt-bindings/pinctrl

On Thu, Aug 5, 2021 at 11:02 AM Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com> wrote:

> Hi Linus,
>
> On 04/08/2021 06:40, Hsin-Yi Wang wrote:
> > Move mt8135-pinfunc.h into include/dt-bindings/pinctrl so that we can
> > include it in yaml examples.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Hsin-Yi Wang <hsinyi@...omium.org>
> > ---
> >  arch/arm/boot/dts/mt8135.dtsi                                   | 2 +-
> >  .../boot/dts => include/dt-bindings/pinctrl}/mt8135-pinfunc.h   | 0
> >  2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >  rename {arch/arm/boot/dts => include/dt-bindings/pinctrl}/mt8135-pinfunc.h (100%)
> >
>
> If that's fine with you, I'll take patch 1+2 through my tree. IMHO the best for
> patch 3 would be to go through your tree.
>
> Sounds good?

It can't be done that way. Patch 3 depends on patch 1+2 to get the
include file into the right place for patch 3/3 to compile. (YAML
check.)

I will apply all three and then provide an immutable branch that you
can pull in to your tree as well. This is usually what we do with
cross-tree dependencies.

Yours,
Linus Walleij