linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 4/5] dt-bindings: iio: light: Avago APDS9306

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: <5089c549-505f-4342-b3fe-bed8a29b6ce1@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2024 08:34:11 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: Subhajit Ghosh <subhajit.ghosh@...aklogic.com>,
 Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>, Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
 Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
 Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@...il.com>,
 Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
 Marek Vasut <marex@...x.de>, Anshul Dalal <anshulusr@...il.com>,
 Javier Carrasco <javier.carrasco.cruz@...il.com>
Cc: Matt Ranostay <matt@...ostay.sg>,
 Stefan Windfeldt-Prytz <stefan.windfeldt-prytz@...s.com>,
 linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/5] dt-bindings: iio: light: Avago APDS9306

On 08/02/2024 11:51, Subhajit Ghosh wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof,
> 
> On 8/2/24 18:48, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 06/02/2024 14:00, Subhajit Ghosh wrote:
>>> Driver support for Avago (Broadcom) APDS9306 Ambient Light Sensor.
>>> Extend avago,apds9300.yaml schema file to support apds9306 device.
>>>
>>> this patch depends on patch:
>>> "dt-bindings: iio: light: adps9300: Update interrupt definitions"
>>
>> Drop the paragraph, not helping. There is no dependency here.
> In the submitting patches guide, I read that if one patch depends
> on another, it should be mentioned.

On another patchset! Not on other patch within patchset. Anyway,
submitting patches don't tell to store it in Git forever because it does
not make sense.

Third, there is no dependency.

> If I try to apply this patch with "git am", it fails without
> first applying the patch dependency mentioned above. Is that fine?

It's just context.




Best regards,
Krzysztof