linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: display: msm: sm6125-mdss: drop unneeded status from examples

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:   Wed, 26 Jul 2023 09:31:03 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@...ainline.org>
Cc:     Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>,
        Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@...cinc.com>,
        Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
        Sean Paul <sean@...rly.run>, David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: display: msm: sm6125-mdss: drop unneeded
 status from examples

On 26/07/2023 09:27, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 25/07/2023 13:46, Marijn Suijten wrote:
>> On 2023-07-25 12:16:10, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> Example DTS should not have 'status' property.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
>>> ---
>>>  .../devicetree/bindings/display/msm/qcom,sm6125-mdss.yaml   | 6 ------
>>
>> This is not needed: it has already been corrected in v3 and v4 of the
>> respective series (among other changes) and the patches were only picked
>> to a preliminary (draft) pull to get an overview of the outstanding work
>> for this subsystem.  That branch happens to be included in regular -next
>> releases though.
>>
>> 6.6 drm/msm display pull: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/msm/-/merge_requests/69
>> v3: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20230718-sm6125-dpu-v3-0-6c5a56e99820@somainline.org/
>> v4: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20230723-sm6125-dpu-v4-0-a3f287dd6c07@somainline.org/
> 
> What do you mean? The old code (one I am fixing) is in current next...
> 
> If this was fixed, why next gets some outdated branches of drm next?
> Each maintainers next tree is supposed to be fed into the next, without
> delays.
> 

Ah, I think I understood - some work in progress was applied to
work-in-progress branch of drm/msm and this somehow got pushed to
linux-next? How anyone is supposed to work on next branches if they are
outdated or have stuff known to be incomplete?

Best regards,
Krzysztof