linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] drm/bridge: panel: Check device dependency before managing device link

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, 29 Nov 2023 13:32:48 +0100
From:   Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>
To:     Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>, daniel@...ll.ch
Cc:     Liu Ying <victor.liu@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
        sfr@...b.auug.org.au, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        rafael@...nel.org, andrzej.hajda@...el.com,
        neil.armstrong@...aro.org, rfoss@...nel.org,
        Laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com, jonas@...boo.se,
        jernej.skrabec@...il.com, maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com,
        tzimmermann@...e.de, airlied@...il.com,
        angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com, ulf.hansson@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] drm/bridge: panel: Check device dependency before
 managing device link

Hi Linus,

On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 11:13:31PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 5:29 PM Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 05:03:53PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> 
> > > > Liu Ying (2):
> > > >   driver core: Export device_is_dependent() to modules
> > > >   drm/bridge: panel: Check device dependency before managing device link
> > >
> > > I just applied patch 1 directly to the drm-misc-fixes so we don't have to
> > > revert and then re-apply patches, because that is a bigger evil. (We can't
> > > rebase these branches...)
> >
> > Erm, you did wait for GKH or Rafael's ACK to do that, right?
> 
> No.
> 
> It is a bigger evil to leave the tree broken than to enforce formal process,
> and it is pretty self-evident. If any of them get annoyed about it we can
> revert the patch, or both.

Yeah, I definitely understand why you did it, but I don't think it's
something we would encourage in drm-misc.

We've discussed it with Sima yesterday, and I think we would even need
the extra check in dim to make sure that a committer shouldn't do that
without dim complaining.

Sima played a bit with it, and it should be doable to get something
fairly reliable if you use get_maintainers.pl to retrieve the git tree
(through scripts/get_maintainer.pl --no-email --no-l --scm) and figuring
out if only drm.git, drm-intel.git or drm-misc.git is involved.

If it isn't, then we should check that there's the ack of one of the
maintainers.

Could you write a patch to do so?

Thanks!
Maxime

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)