linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/6] dt-bindings: pinctrl: Add compatibles for Allwinner D1/D1s

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: <879fb3b2-4bcb-82d6-e186-e845d62c9843@sholland.org>
Date:   Tue, 12 Jul 2022 05:14:57 -0500
From:   Samuel Holland <samuel@...lland.org>
To:     Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc:     Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
        Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@...il.com>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>, Ondrej Jirman <x@....cz>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-sunxi@...ts.linux.dev,
        Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] dt-bindings: pinctrl: Add compatibles for Allwinner
 D1/D1s

Hi Linus,

On 7/11/22 3:58 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 26, 2022 at 4:11 AM Samuel Holland <samuel@...lland.org> wrote:
> 
>> D1 contains a pin controller similar to previous SoCs, but with some
>> register layout changes. It includes 6 interrupt-capable pin banks.
>>
>> D1s is a low pin count version of the D1 SoC, with some pins omitted.
>> The remaining pins have the same function assignments as D1.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Samuel Holland <samuel@...lland.org>
> 
> All 6 patches applied to the pinctrl tree, the last patch 6/6
> required some fuzzing so please check the result!

Somehow the version of patch 6 applied to the pinctrl tree did not include the
new driver source file. It only applied changes to existing files (including the
Makefile reference to the new file).

I also needed to make some minor changes to patch 6 to resolve comments from Andre.

Is it okay if I send a v2 of just patch 6? Or do I need to send a follow-up
based on what was already applied?

Regards,
Samuel