linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 08/11] mfd: qcom-pm8xxx: drop unused PM8018 compatible

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: <Y2KBbzFsMucTA5EF@google.com>
Date:   Wed, 2 Nov 2022 14:40:47 +0000
From:   Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
Cc:     Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Satya Priya <quic_c_skakit@...cinc.com>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...ainline.org>,
        Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@...ertech.it>,
        linux-input@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 08/11] mfd: qcom-pm8xxx: drop unused PM8018 compatible

On Wed, 02 Nov 2022, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:

> On 31/10/2022 11:32, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Fri, 21 Oct 2022, Neil Armstrong wrote:
> > 
> >> The PM8018 compatible is always used with PM8921 fallback, so PM8018
> >> compatible can be safely removed from device ID table
> >>
> >> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
> >> Signed-off-by: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>
> > 
> > Tags should appear chronologically.
> > 
> 
> I would assume that as well, but `b4 trailers` disagrees. It documents
> even this behavior (the chain of custody) here:
> https://b4.docs.kernel.org/en/latest/config.html
> 
> So while I agree with you, I also prefer the tools to make the decision
> instead of humans (to follow the process, assuming the tool implements
> the process). Either the tool should be fixed or the tool's decision is
> correct.

Take a look further down the thread, since this has already been
heavily debated.  Not sure if there has been a clear winner or any
kind of agreement yet (if there ever will be), but until there is or I
until I am convinced otherwise, I'm going to continue on with the
chronological method.

Also, as far as I'm aware, tools like `b4` and the-like haven't been
mandated (yet?), so using its rules to dictate our actions probably
isn't the correct approach.

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]