linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 05/11] iio: adc: qcom-spmi-adc5: remove support for ADC7 compatible string

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <3b417e21-1726-a026-cd53-e68cc49b56fc@linaro.org>
Date:   Sun, 9 Jul 2023 19:38:29 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Jishnu Prakash <quic_jprakash@...cinc.com>, agross@...nel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linus.walleij@...aro.org, Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com,
        sboyd@...nel.org, dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org,
        quic_subbaram@...cinc.com, quic_collinsd@...cinc.com,
        quic_kamalw@...cinc.com, quic_jestar@...cinc.com,
        marijn.suijten@...ainline.org, andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
        Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     linux-arm-msm-owner@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/11] iio: adc: qcom-spmi-adc5: remove support for ADC7
 compatible string

On 08/07/2023 09:28, Jishnu Prakash wrote:
> Now that usage of "ADC7" name has been replaced with usage of "ADC5
> Gen2" name everywhere, remove the "qcom,spmi-adc7" compatible string.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jishnu Prakash <quic_jprakash@...cinc.com>
> ---
>  drivers/iio/adc/qcom-spmi-adc5.c | 4 ----

Your patchset is not bisectable. Neither this patch nor cover letter
marked this. This is not correct and will lead to broken kernels.

Even if not considering bisectability, this basically breaks the ABI
without any explanation and rationale.

Breaking ABI just because you want to rename something, is not the way
to go, so NAK. Sorry.

Best regards,
Krzysztof