linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] dt-bindings: pinctrl: qcom-pmic-gpio: Add pm7550ba support

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]

Date:   Thu, 6 Jul 2023 17:04:46 +0200
From:   Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
To:     Rohit Agarwal <quic_rohiagar@...cinc.com>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
        agross@...nel.org, andersson@...nel.org, linus.walleij@...aro.org,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org,
        conor+dt@...nel.org
Cc:     linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] dt-bindings: pinctrl: qcom-pmic-gpio: Add pm7550ba
 support

On 6.07.2023 16:45, Rohit Agarwal wrote:
> 
> On 7/6/2023 8:05 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 06/07/2023 15:30, Rohit Agarwal wrote:
>>> Add support for the pm7550ba GPIO support to the Qualcomm PMIC GPIO
>>> binding.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Rohit Agarwal <quic_rohiagar@...cinc.com>
>>> ---
>>>   Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/qcom,pmic-gpio.yaml | 3 +++
>> I doubt that all your patches here and other patchsets are v1. Otherwise
>> how did you get my Acks and Rbs? Please use proper versioning and
>> provide changelog.
>>
>> What changed here?
> 
> Actually this is part of the original bigger series [1] that as per Bjorn's suggestion need to be broken
> down according to the subsystem/maintainer.
> Since it got broken down into multiple smaller series, I didnt include the versioning.
All of that information should be included in the cover letter, to
limit confusion both for maintainers and patch workflow tools.

Since these patches all come from a separate series, it would be
good for you to version this one as v(BIG_SERIES_REVISION)+1 because
they've already been on LKML at least once. That would especially hold
true if this revision included any changes.

Konrad
> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/9de424ca-271a-8ed2-5550-658a828c4ea5@quicinc.com/
> 
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Krzysztof
>>