linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 8/9] arm/arm64: dts: mediatek: Fix existing NAND controller node name

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]

Date:   Fri, 16 Dec 2022 12:24:36 +0100
From:   Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>
To:     AngeloGioacchino Del Regno 
        <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
        Xiangsheng Hou <xiangsheng.hou@...iatek.com>,
        Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Chuanhong Guo <gch981213@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, benliang.zhao@...iatek.com,
        bin.zhang@...iatek.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 8/9] arm/arm64: dts: mediatek: Fix existing NAND
 controller node name



On 13/12/2022 10:42, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
> Il 09/12/22 07:43, Xiangsheng Hou ha scritto:
>> Change the existing node name in order to match NAND controller DT
>> bindings.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Xiangsheng Hou <xiangsheng.hou@...iatek.com>
>> ---
>>   arch/arm/boot/dts/mt2701.dtsi             | 2 +-
>>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt2712e.dtsi | 2 +-
>>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt7622.dtsi  | 2 +-
>>   3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
> 
> Splitting this in two commits, one for ARM and one for ARM64 would probably
> be better, but since I don't have strong opinions on that...

Yes please split this up.

Thanks!

> 
> Reviewed-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>
> 
>