linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add RK3566 LubanCat 1

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:   Wed, 21 Dec 2022 17:37:11 +0800
From:   ty <zonyitoo@...il.com>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, Peter Geis <pgwipeout@...il.com>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org, DHDAXCW <lasstp5011@...il.com>,
        Heiko Stübner <heiko@...ech.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add RK3566 LubanCat 1

Dear Kozlowski,

We just got where we did wrong by reading twice about the
generic-name-recommendation document and comparing our PATCHes with
others. We will make a new PATCH v5 addressing all the comments.

Thanks for your patient. We felt sincerely sorry.

Recards.

Yuteng Zhong, DHDAXCW.

ty <zonyitoo@...il.com> 于2022年12月21日周三 17:18写道：
>
> Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org> 于2022年12月21日周三 17:05写道：
> >
> > On 21/12/2022 10:01, ty wrote:
> > > thanks. I am really sorry.
> > >
> > > I fixed this based on your feedback in the PATCH V2 content. Regarding
> > > the dts issue, I used the kernel-5.15 kernel adaptation before, which
> > > may not be perfect at that time.
> >
> > Do not send patches based on v5.15. This is some very old kernel. We do
> > not work on such stuff.
>
> Thank you for your kindly reminder. We have modified the whole .dts
> file based on v6.2 kernel and follow the generic-name-regulation[0] in
> [PATCH v4]. Because it was basically a whole rewrite, so I decided to
> send a new PATCH v4.
>
> [0] https://devicetree-specification.readthedocs.io/en/latest/chapter2-devicetree-basics.html#generic-names-recommendation
>
> >
> > The comment was:
> > "Node names should be generic, so at least with regulator prefix or suffix."
>
> Yes. Node names are all changed in [PATCH v4].