linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: microchip: add missing cache properties

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: <67bf21d4cf9573233fc8154ae73b966adba6df09.camel@microchip.com>
Date:   Wed, 17 May 2023 14:46:38 +0200
From:   Steen Hegelund <steen.hegelund@...rochip.com>
To:     Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
CC:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Lars Povlsen <lars.povlsen@...rochip.com>,
        Daniel Machon <daniel.machon@...rochip.com>,
        <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: microchip: add missing cache properties

Hi Conor and Krzysztof,

On Wed, 2023-05-17 at 13:37 +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> Hey,
> 
> On Wed, May 17, 2023 at 02:10:53PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On 17/05/2023 13:38, Steen Hegelund wrote:
> > > Hi Krzysztof,
> > > 
> > > I would love to do that, but I am not familiar with the procedure, so
> > > maybe you
> > > could help me out?
> > 
> > Hm, there is no dedicated maintainer for Microchip ARM64 platforms? I
> > mean one which actually handles the patches?
> > 
> > It looks like it, because my recent changes were going through me. This
> > also means that maybe several other changes got ignored. For example:
> 
> Aye and the branches etc in the repo itself are all a wee bit stale.
> 
> > > This is my understanding of what I need to do:
> > > 
> > > Clone the upstream repo listed in MAINTAINERS:
> > > 
> > > git clone git@...hub.com:microchip-ung/linux-upstream.git
> > > cd linux-upstream
> > > git checkout sparx5-next
> > > 
> > > Fetch the latest mainline tag from upstream:
> > > 
> > > git fetch git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git
> > > tag\
> > >  v6.4-rc2 --no-tags
> > > 
> > > Rebase the current branch on top of that tag:
> > > 
> > > git rebase v6.4-rc2
> > > 
> > > Use b4 to fetch and apply the mail thread patch series:
> > > 
> > > b4 shazam -tsl 20230421223155.115339-1-krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org
> > 
> > You should collect some more patches... For one patch it is probably too
> > much effort. I can take it instead.
> > 
> > > Tag the current work for inclusion in the next kernel version with a
> > > decription:
> > > 
> > > git tag -s sparx5-dt-6.5
> > 
> > git tag -a -s sparx5-dt-6.5
> > 
> > Because you need to provide some explanation. Take a look at examples
> > from other sub-arch maintainers what to write in the tag:
> > 
> > https://lore.kernel.org/soc/20230410170233.5931-1-andersson@kernel.org/T/#u
> > 
> > https://lore.kernel.org/soc/20230405080438.156805-1-krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org/T/
> > 
> > > 
> > > Push work that to the public repo:
> > > 
> > > git push origin sparx5-dt-6.5
> > > 
> > > Create a pull request (to stdout) to be included in an email to the
> > > maintainers:
> > > 
> > > git request-pull v6.4-rc2 origin sparx5-dt-6.5
> > > 
> > > Send this PR to the maintainers and CC co-maintainers.
> > > 
> > > Is this the correct procedure?
> > > Who should I send the PR email to (is there a list somewhere)?
> > 
> > Yes, it's correct with few nits I mentioned.
> > 
> > You send it to arm@, soc@, Olof and Arnd. Addresses are in examples above.
> > 
> > I will be preparing today the pull with various cleanups for arm-soc, so
> > I will take the patch if you do not mind.

Absolutely - and I am glad that I at least got to a point where I understand the
procedure, but as changes are far between, I was not aware that I had some
responsibilities here.

Thanks for the clarification!

> > 
> > For future (and all previous patches), please think what do you
> > (you=Microchip) want to do with it. If you do not handle the patches,
> > then someone should or the platform should be marked as "Odd fixes".
> 
> If noone is set up to actually be the maintainer of the tree, and the
> patch volume is low, it might be a good idea to combine its maintenance
> with some of the other microchip trees.
> 
> I've added Nicolas to CC here, since he is the main maintainer for the
> 32-bit ARM Microchip stuff. For some context, I maintain the RISC-V
> Microchip bits and a few other things like dt-bindings and some
> non-microchip RISC-V platforms.
> 
> If you like, I could easily pick up patches for
> arch/arm64/boot/dts/microchip/* as I am already sending PRs to Arnd for
> other trees and another branch would not be much overhead!
> 
> Clearly I do not know the hardware at all, and reviewing the patches
> would still be up to you, but I could handle the "administrative" side
> of things (applying the patches & sending PRs) if that would be helpful?
> 
> Otherwise, Nicolas & I could probably help you through setting things up
> to send PRs without taking up Krzysztof's time?
> 
> Either works for me!

It would be preferable for me if you (Conor) would handle the
arch/arm64/boot/dts/microchip/* tree as you suggested.  It is not often we
update it, so it will hopefully be low overhead for you.

> 
> Thanks,
> Conor.

Thanks to both of you for the assistance.

Best Regards
Steen