linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] Documentation/process: add soc maintainer handbook

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: <ed4c3564-4083-5568-f999-cfd7f02544a7@linaro.org>
Date:   Wed, 31 May 2023 08:51:25 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>,
        Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>, soc@...nel.org
Cc:     conor@...nel.org, corbet@....net, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
        olof@...om.net, palmer@...belt.com, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        arnd@...db.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Documentation/process: add soc maintainer handbook

On 31/05/2023 08:30, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
>> +appropriate time later.  Most importantly, any incompatible changes should be
>> +clearly pointed out in the patch description and pull request, along with the
>> +expected impact on existing users, such as bootloaders or other operating
>> +systems.
>> +
>> +Driver Branch Dependencies
>> +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>> +
>> +A common problem is synchronizing changes between device drivers and devicetree
>> +files, even if a change is compatible in both directions, this may require
>> +coordinating how the changes get merged through different maintainer trees.
>> +
>> +Usually the branch that includes a driver change will also include the
>> +corresponding change to the devicetree binding description, to ensure they are
>> +in fact compatible.  This means that the devicetree branch can end up causing
>> +warnings in the "make dtbs_check" step.  If a devicetree change depends on
>> +missing additions to a header file in include/dt-bindings/, it will fail the
>> +"make dtbs" step and not get merged.
> 
> Sounds like passing `make dtbs` is a merging requirement.

And why shouldn't be?

Best regards,
Krzysztof