linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 6/6] arm64: defconfig: Add tps65219 as modules

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: <81e3a8d8-9c20-6711-f2c9-54c366aab276@baylibre.com>
Date:   Thu, 13 Oct 2022 15:22:19 +0200
From:   jerome Neanne <jneanne@...libre.com>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>, lgirdwood@...il.com,
        broonie@...nel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org, nm@...com,
        kristo@...nel.org, dmitry.torokhov@...il.com,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, catalin.marinas@....com,
        will@...nel.org, lee@...nel.org, tony@...mide.com, vigneshr@...com,
        bjorn.andersson@...aro.org, shawnguo@...nel.org,
        geert+renesas@...der.be, dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org,
        marcel.ziswiler@...adex.com, vkoul@...nel.org,
        biju.das.jz@...renesas.com, arnd@...db.de, jeff@...undy.com
Cc:     afd@...com, narmstrong@...libre.com, msp@...libre.com,
        j-keerthy@...com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-input@...r.kernel.org, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 6/6] arm64: defconfig: Add tps65219 as modules



On 13/10/2022 14:32, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 12/10/2022 13:56, Kevin Hilman wrote:
>> Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org> writes:
>>
>>> On 12/10/2022 04:39, jerome Neanne wrote:
>>>>> You explained what you did, which is easily visible. You did not explain
>>>>> why you are doing it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>> Krzysztof
>>>>>
>>>> Thanks for pointing me to the detailed guidelines
>>>> I'm new to upstream and not well aware of all good practices.
>>>>
>>>> Would below commit message be more suitable:
>>>>
>>>> Add support for the TPS65219 PMIC by enabling MFD, regulator and
>>>> power-button drivers.  All drivers enabled as modules.
>>>
>>> This still says only what you did. I still does not explain why.
>>
>> Jerome, maybe adding a bit of preamble like:
>>
>> "Development boards from TI include the TPS65219 PMIC.  Add support..."
> 
> I would propose: "Development boards from TI with xxx SoC include the
> ..." because the point is that you use this defconfig for boards for
> given SoC (supported by upstream).
> 
> Other way would be "Foo-bar development board includes the TP..."
> 
>>
>> Krzysztof, I'm the first to argue for descriptive/verbose changelogs,
>> but IMO, this is getting a little bit nit-picky.
>>
>> The series adds a new driver, DTS and defconfig patches to enable
>> support the new driver.  The "why" for changes to defconfig changes like
>> this are kind of implied/obvious, and there is lots of precedent for
>> changelogs of defconfig changes for simple drivers to simply say "enable
>> X and Y".
> 
> While I understand the entire patchset, the defconfig goes via separate
> tree/branch and must stand on its own. Later (one month, one year, one
> decade) someone will look at history and wonder why the heck we enabled
> TPS65219.
> 
>>
>> If my above suggesion is not enough, please make a suggestion for what
>> you think would qualify as an appropritate changelong that answers "why"
>> for a simple driver change.
> 
> It is enough :)
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
> 
Got it! I'll rephrase following your suggestion