linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] dt-bindings: reset: syscon-reboot: Add priority property

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: <bcfb143d-1d1b-590b-ac7d-7624f9069708@linaro.org>
Date:   Fri, 3 Feb 2023 13:35:09 +0100
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Sebastian Reichel <sebastian.reichel@...labora.com>,
        Pali Rohár <pali@...nel.org>
Cc:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] dt-bindings: reset: syscon-reboot: Add priority
 property

On 03/02/2023 13:16, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 12:27:44PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote:
>> On Monday 26 December 2022 12:45:11 Pali Rohár wrote:
>>> This new optional priority property allows to specify custom priority level
>>> of reset device. Prior this change priority level was hardcoded to 192 and
>>> not possible to specify or change. Specifying other value is needed for
>>> some boards. Default level when not specified stays at 192 as before.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Pali Rohár <pali@...nel.org>
>>
>> Reminder: Any plan how to handle these patches?
> 
> Please don't top-post :) Sorry, I'm a bit slow with processing
> patches this cycle. Technically this was also throwing a DT
> warning reported by the bot, so I expected a new version. Anyways,
> I fixed the DT warning myself and applied patches 1-2.

Everyone was expecting new version, so that checks pass. We should not
take known-broken code, because then the duty to check for other errors
is on you Sebastian. :)

Best regards,
Krzysztof