linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] iio: adc: Add rtq6056 support

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAHp75Vct4YytjXmFVtqKEM6zK84=PsTDD7=y7mxjELjZMj845A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 6 Jul 2022 14:45:13 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     ChiYuan Huang <u0084500@...il.com>
Cc:     Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
        cy_huang <cy_huang@...htek.com>,
        linux-iio <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] iio: adc: Add rtq6056 support

On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 3:08 AM ChiYuan Huang <u0084500@...il.com> wrote:
> Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> 於 2022年7月6日 週三 凌晨3:09寫道：
> > On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 6:31 PM cy_huang <u0084500@...il.com> wrote:

...

> > > +KernelVersion: 5.15.31
> >
> > ^^^ Wrong
> >
> I really cannot understand what kernel version I need to specified.
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAHp75VeBdgbyDQXEYb9ZZdi3AU=vPw6aKGWbNLnuA_QoN4LE4A@mail.gmail.com/
>
> Last time, my understanding is to use the realistic kernel version.
> Then from my  development environment, the kernel  I used is 5.15.31.
> That's why I changed it from '5.18.2' to '5.15.31'.
>
> Do you mind to tell me what kernel version I need to write for this
> ABI test document?
> I'm almost confused about 'realistic', 'non-stable', nor 'developing'.
>
> If to write '5.19' or the future version '5.20', is it ok?

It's as simple as "next version that most likely your patch will be
in", in 99.9% cases it's 'current-cycle-version + 1', i.e. 5.20.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko