linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 21/23] regulator: dt-bindings: update samsung,s2mpa01.yaml reference

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: <YXjArKJ1nw3rkx97@robh.at.kernel.org>
Date:   Tue, 26 Oct 2021 21:59:56 -0500
From:   Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To:     Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>
Cc:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 21/23] regulator: dt-bindings: update
 samsung,s2mpa01.yaml reference

On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 07:30:13AM +0100, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Em Tue, 19 Oct 2021 13:04:59 +0100
> Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> escreveu:
> 
> > On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 09:04:20AM +0100, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> > 
> > > To mailbombing on a large number of people, only mailing lists were C/C on the cover.
> > > See [PATCH v3 00/23] at: https://lore.kernel.org/all/cover.1634630485.git.mchehab+huawei@kernel.org/  
> > 
> > It'd be a bit easier to put a note in here about what the dependencies
> > are rather than forcing people to go out to a link to figure out what's
> > going on unless it's complicated. 
> >
> > For a case like this where there's no
> > dependencies or real relationship between the patches it's probably
> > better to just not thread everything and send the patches separately to
> > everyone, the threading is just adding noise and confusion.
> 
> It is not that easy, unfortunately. On some cases (specially due to
> DT binding renames) some patches change the context of a hunk, affecting
> a subsequent patch.

Those should be reduced now. I've been checking the renames since early 
August. July really, but MAINTAINERS was not getting checked initially.


> I tried a couple of times in the past to send the patches individually,
> but that was messier, as there was harder for people to apply them,
> as, instead of running b4 just once to get everything, maintainers
> would need to apply each patch individually. Also, there were cases
> where the patch order would be relevant, due to context changes.

Just spliting between in Linus' tree and only in next would help me. The 
former I know I can just apply.

> Btw, talking about what it would be easier, the best procedure to
> adopt is to run:
> 
> 	./scripts/documentation-file-ref-check 
> 
> Before sending/applying patches touching documents.

Good luck with that. :(

> That would avoid the need of such fixup patches ;-)
> 
> Unfortunately, in the specific case of dt-bindings, things are not
> that easy, as doc changes usually go via one tree, while references 
> to them come from other places.
> 
> Regards,
> Mauro
>