linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 00/10] regulator/mfd/clock: dt-bindings: Samsung S2M and S5M to dtschema

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]

Message-ID: <YV2ig7q0UWQQC5N2@google.com>
Date:   Wed, 6 Oct 2021 14:20:03 +0100
From:   Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>
Cc:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
        Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@...sung.com>,
        Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@...il.com>,
        Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/10] regulator/mfd/clock: dt-bindings: Samsung S2M
 and S5M to dtschema

On Wed, 06 Oct 2021, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

> On 05/10/2021 15:14, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Tue, 05 Oct 2021, Mark Brown wrote:
> > 
> >> On Fri, Oct 01, 2021 at 11:40:56AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >>
> >>> Merging/dependencies
> >>> ====================
> >>> 1. Regulator related binding changes depend on first two commits (the
> >>>    fixes), because of context.
> >>> 2. The mfd bindings depend on clock and regulator bindings.
> >>>
> >>> The fixes and bindings changes (patches 1-10) should go via the same
> >>> tree.  For example regulator or mfd tree.  I propose the regulator tree,
> >>> since it will have also one driver change (the fix, first commit).
> >>
> >> Lee, Stephen, Michael does Krzysztof's plan make sense to you?
> > 
> > I tend to take cross subsystem patches.  MFD is usually in the centre
> > of these scenarios and I have tooling to easily set-up immutable
> > branches/pull-requests.
> > 
> > Always happy to discuss if others have different/better ideas though.
> > 
> 
> Another alternative is that regulator patches (1-2, 4-6) go via Mark who
> later gives you a stable branch/tag to pull. Then the clock and MFD
> bindings would go on top via MFD tree.

It shouldn't matter where they are first applied.  Creating 2
immutable branches when just 1 will do would be a pain.

> There is a comment from Rob which I will fix in v3.

Sure.

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