linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mmc: sdhci-esdhc-imx: improve ESDHC_FLAG

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: <CAPDyKFq9VpSDuD1itDPZ0cYdRJuHvYcK=+Si-u1YkDqQhBAcQQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 16 Aug 2023 23:36:43 +0200
From:   Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
To:     Giulio Benetti <giulio.benetti@...ettiengineering.com>
Cc:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, Haibo Chen <haibo.chen@....com>,
        Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
        Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
        Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
        NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@....com>,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
        Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
        linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jim Reinhart <jimr@...vox.com>,
        James Autry <jautry@...vox.com>,
        Matthew Maron <matthewm@...vox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: sdhci-esdhc-imx: improve ESDHC_FLAG_ERR010450

On Wed, 16 Aug 2023 at 19:14, Giulio Benetti
<giulio.benetti@...ettiengineering.com> wrote:
>
> Hello Ulf, and All,
>
> +Cc Andrew Lunn,
>
> On 16/08/23 11:52, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 at 23:49, Giulio Benetti
> > <giulio.benetti@...ettiengineering.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Errata ERR010450 only shows up if voltage is 1.8V, but if the device is
> >> supplied by 3v3 the errata can be ignored. So let's check for if quirk
> >> SDHCI_QUIRK2_NO_1_8_V is defined or not before limiting the frequency.
> >>
> >> Sponsored by: Tekvox Inc.
> >
> > Didn't know we have this kind of tag. Can you point me to the
> > documentation of it?
>
> I've been pointed by Andew Lunn almost the same question here:
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/859ff6a9-3ba9-ea2e-7b85-01813c5df0dd@broadcom.com/t/
>
> and also asked to update:
> Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst
>
> I've taken inspiration by this commit:
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=73c289bac05919286f8c7e1660fcaf6ec0468363
>
> where there is "Sponsored by:" and not "Sponsored-by:" otherwise
> checkpatch.pl script complains about it.
>
> Other commits already have that sort of tag.

Yes, but that seems silly to me.

We should not be using tags in this way. First there needs to be an
agreement of what kind of tags we should allow in the commit messages,
before we start using them.

>
> I could add Sponsored-by tag documentation and in checkpatch.pl script
> as well as other possible scripts where required as pointed by Andrew.
>
> I think this is a good way to give credits to companies that sponsor
> patches and it could be more interesting for companies in general to
> pay someone to upstream patches because they have their name on it.
> Otherwise it's not an everyday task to add a driver from scratch
> and write in the top comment that is sponsored by some company.
> Also now there is SPDX so that part would be dropped too.
>
> What do you All think about this? Do I go for a RFC patchset to add
> the Sponsored-by: tag?

My opinion is just one voice here, so at this point it doesn't really
matter what I think.

If *you* think this is a good idea, I encourage you to submit an RFC
to the kernel docs for this. In this way we can collect the comments
and see if people think this is a good idea.

That said, do you want me to apply $subject patch without the tag or
would you rather proceed with submitting an RFC first?

[...]

Kind regards
Uffe