[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2023100856-cried-herald-25cf@gregkh>
Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2023 15:08:00 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: "Peng Fan (OSS)" <peng.fan@....nxp.com>
Cc: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@....com>,
Anson Huang <Anson.Huang@....com>, Bai Ping <ping.bai@....com>,
Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@...e.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] nvmem: imx: correct nregs for i.MX6ULL
On Sun, Oct 08, 2023 at 04:10:22PM +0800, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote:
> From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
>
> The nregs for i.MX6ULL should be 80 per fuse map, correct it.
>
> Fixes: ffbc34bf0e9c ("nvmem: imx-ocotp: Implement i.MX6ULL/ULZ support")
> Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
> ---
> drivers/nvmem/imx-ocotp.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/nvmem/imx-ocotp.c b/drivers/nvmem/imx-ocotp.c
> index 8d30c8bfdbcf..f1e202efaa49 100644
> --- a/drivers/nvmem/imx-ocotp.c
> +++ b/drivers/nvmem/imx-ocotp.c
> @@ -519,7 +519,7 @@ static const struct ocotp_params imx6ul_params = {
> };
>
> static const struct ocotp_params imx6ull_params = {
> - .nregs = 64,
> + .nregs = 80,
> .bank_address_words = 0,
> .set_timing = imx_ocotp_set_imx6_timing,
> .ctrl = IMX_OCOTP_BM_CTRL_DEFAULT,
>
> --
> 2.37.1
>
Hi,
This is the friendly patch-bot of Greg Kroah-Hartman. You have sent him
a patch that has triggered this response. He used to manually respond
to these common problems, but in order to save his sanity (he kept
writing the same thing over and over, yet to different people), I was
created. Hopefully you will not take offence and will fix the problem
in your patch and resubmit it so that it can be accepted into the Linux
kernel tree.
You are receiving this message because of the following common error(s)
as indicated below:
- Your patch breaks the build.
- Your patch contains warnings and/or errors noticed by the
scripts/checkpatch.pl tool.
- Your patch is malformed (tabs converted to spaces, linewrapped, etc.)
and can not be applied. Please read the file,
Documentation/process/email-clients.rst in order to fix this.
- Your patch was attached, please place it inline so that it can be
applied directly from the email message itself.
- Your patch does not have a Signed-off-by: line. Please read the
kernel file, Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst and resend
it after adding that line. Note, the line needs to be in the body of
the email, before the patch, not at the bottom of the patch or in the
email signature.
- Your patch was sent privately to Greg. Kernel development is done in
public, please always cc: a public mailing list with a patch
submission. Using the tool, scripts/get_maintainer.pl on the patch
will tell you what mailing list to cc.
- Your patch did many different things all at once, making it difficult
to review. All Linux kernel patches need to only do one thing at a
time. If you need to do multiple things (such as clean up all coding
style issues in a file/driver), do it in a sequence of patches, each
one doing only one thing. This will make it easier to review the
patches to ensure that they are correct, and to help alleviate any
merge issues that larger patches can cause.
- Your patch did not apply to any known trees that Greg is in control
of. Possibly this is because you made it against Linus's tree, not
the linux-next tree, which is where all of the development for the
next version of the kernel is at. Please refresh your patch against
the linux-next tree, or even better yet, the development tree
specified in the MAINTAINERS file for the subsystem you are submitting
a patch for, and resend it.
- You sent multiple patches, yet no indication of which ones should be
applied in which order. Greg could just guess, but if you are
receiving this email, he guessed wrong and the patches didn't apply.
Please read the section entitled "The canonical patch format" in the
kernel file, Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst for a
description of how to do this so that Greg has a chance to apply these
correctly.
- You did not specify a description of why the patch is needed, or
possibly, any description at all, in the email body. Please read the
section entitled "The canonical patch format" in the kernel file,
Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst for what is needed in
order to properly describe the change.
- You did not write a descriptive Subject: for the patch, allowing Greg,
and everyone else, to know what this patch is all about. Please read
the section entitled "The canonical patch format" in the kernel file,
Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst for what a proper
Subject: line should look like.
- It looks like you did not use your "real" name for the patch on either
the Signed-off-by: line, or the From: line (both of which have to
match). Please read the kernel file,
Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst for how to do this
correctly.
- This looks like a new version of a previously submitted patch, but you
did not list below the --- line any changes from the previous version.
Please read the section entitled "The canonical patch format" in the
kernel file, Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst for what
needs to be done here to properly describe this.
- You sent a patch that has been sent multiple times in the past few
days, and is identical to ones that has been recently rejected.
Please always look at the mailing list traffic to determine if you are
duplicating other people's work.
- You have marked a patch with a "Fixes:" tag for a commit that is in an
older released kernel, yet you do not have a cc: stable line in the
signed-off-by area at all, which means that the patch will not be
applied to any older kernel releases. To properly fix this, please
follow the documented rules in the
Documetnation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst file for how to resolve
this.
If you wish to discuss this problem further, or you have questions about
how to resolve this issue, please feel free to respond to this email and
Greg will reply once he has dug out from the pending patches received
from other developers.
thanks,
greg k-h's patch email bot
Powered by blists - more mailing lists