linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/8] nvmem: Let layout drivers be 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: <20230306160023.40171f2e@xps-13>
Date:   Mon, 6 Mar 2023 16:00:23 +0100
From:   Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Rafał Miłecki <rafal@...ecki.pl>,
        Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
        Robert Marko <robert.marko@...tura.hr>,
        Luka Perkov <luka.perkov@...tura.hr>,
        Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] nvmem: Let layout drivers be modules

Hello,

gregkh@...uxfoundation.org wrote on Mon, 6 Mar 2023 14:55:44 +0100:

> On Mon, Mar 06, 2023 at 02:54:10PM +0100, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> > On 2023-03-01 16:22, Miquel Raynal wrote:  
> > > The base series on which these changes apply is still contained in [1],
> > > I would prefer to keep it as it was and apply this series on top of it.
> > > 
> > > (...)
> > > 
> > > [1] https://github.com/miquelraynal/linux/tree/nvmem-next/layouts  
> > 
> > My experience with kernel development over all subsystems I touched is
> > that patches should be improved until being clean & acceptable. I never
> > sent a series with more recent patches fixing issues in earlier patches
> > of the same seriee.
> > 
> > So my preference would be to get a new, clean & complete set of patches.  
> 
> I agree, don't break something and then fix it up in a later patch, that
> makes bisection impossible.

Apart from two rather small fixes which I can squash if that's what you
are requesting, most of the series is already fine on its own, fully
working and bisectable. On top of that initial series from Michael I am
adding support for compiling additional code as modules, which is
arguably another feature. I don't see the point in merging them both
besides mixing two different works. Looking at the code shows that every
step is pretty clean, there is nothing going back and forth.

I will anyway try to make it look like a single series with the changes
requested by Rob in v2.

Thanks,
Miquèl