linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the phy-next tree with the gcom tree

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:   Tue, 26 Oct 2021 08:28:37 +0200
From:   Stephan Gerhold <stephan@...hold.net>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>
Cc:     Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com>,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the phy-next tree with the gcom tree

Hi,

On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 03:44:15PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Today's linux-next merge of the phy-next tree got a conflict in:
> 
>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/apq8096-db820c.dtsi
> 
> between commit:
> 
>   442ee1fc60c4 ("arm64: dts: qcom: Drop unneeded extra device-specific includes")
> 
> from the gcom tree and commit:
> 
>   956bbf2a94e8 ("arm64: dts: qcom: Add missing vdd-supply for QUSB2 PHY")
> 
> from the phy-next tree.
> 

Sorry about that.

> I fixed it up (the former removed the file, so I did that) and can

The commit actually simply moves all of apq8096-db820c.dtsi into
apq8096-db820c.dts. So we should make sure that the vdd-supply added in
956bbf2a94e8 ("arm64: dts: qcom: Add missing vdd-supply for QUSB2 PHY")
ends up in almost the same position in apq8096-db820c.dts instead.

But I'm confused why the arm64 dts commit is in the phy-next tree. There
is no compile time dependency between it and the related phy commits so
it could have just been applied to the qcom tree to avoid this conflict.

And actually Vinod wrote 2 minutes after applying this patch that Bjorn
should take it through the qcom tree:

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/YVwDbUC5WUHmcRJh@matsya/

Vinod, did you apply it accidentally or am I missing something here? :)

Thanks,
Stephan