linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/5] ARM: DTS: qcom: fix dtbs

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: <62c5f2bc.1c69fb81.90a5.aec9@mx.google.com>
Date:   Wed, 6 Jul 2022 22:38:18 +0200
From:   Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@...il.com>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
Cc:     Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...ainline.org>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] ARM: DTS: qcom: fix dtbs_check warning with new
 rpmcc clocks

On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 10:09:05PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 06/07/2022 21:10, Christian Marangi wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 05:07:12PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >> On 06/07/2022 12:20, Christian Marangi wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 09:44:04AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >>>> On 05/07/2022 22:28, Christian Marangi wrote:
> >>>>> Fix dtbs_check warning for new rpmcc Documentation changes and add the
> >>>>> required clocks.
> >>>>
> >>>> There is no warning in the kernel, right? So the commit is not correct.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Oh ok, the warning is generated by the new Documentation.
> >>
> >> Patches, especially DTS, might go via different trees, so the moment DTS
> >> is applied there might be no such warning.
> >>
> > 
> > I'm still confused about this topic...
> > With this kind of change, I notice I sent Documentation change and then
> > rob bot complain about dtbs_check having warning...
> > 
> > So the correct way is to send Documentation change and fix dtbs_check
> > warning in the same commit OR keep what I'm doing with sending
> > Documentation changes and fix DTS in a separate commit?
> 
> Binding is almost always separate from DTS and always separate from
> driver. The order depends on what you're doing. If you bring ABI break
> change to bindings, then the order does not matter, because each order
> will be non-bisectable. Because you broke ABI. That's the case in this
> patchset.
> 
> For other cases, usually bindings patches should be the first in patchset.
> 
> How it goes via maintainer trees is not your problem here. Patches might
> go together or might go separate.
> 
> Anyway it was not the topic of my comment. Comment was about not
> specific commit msg which does not fit the Linux kernel process and does
> not fit git history once applied by maintainer. It fits even less when
> backported to stable kernels, which you commit msg encourages to do.
>

It was a more generic question so sorry for the OT.

Will reword the commit description, thanks again for the clarification
about this generic topic.

-- 
	Ansuel