linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] arm64: dts: qcom: qcs6490-rb3gen2: enable hdmi bridge

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, 8 May 2024 09:38:50 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@...cinc.com>,
 Venkata Prahlad Valluru <quic_vvalluru@...cinc.com>, andersson@...nel.org
Cc: conor+dt@...nel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 konrad.dybcio@...aro.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org,
 linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 quic_nankam@...cinc.com, robh@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] arm64: dts: qcom: qcs6490-rb3gen2: enable hdmi bridge

On 07/05/2024 21:20, Abhinav Kumar wrote:
> 
> 
> On 5/7/2024 9:35 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 07/05/2024 18:30, Venkata Prahlad Valluru wrote:
>>> Rb3Gen2 has a lt9611uxc DSI-to-HDMI bridge on i2c0, with
>>> reset gpio from pm7250b gpio2 and irq gpio from tlmm gpio24.
>>> Bridge supplies are Vdd connected to input supply directly
>>> and vcc to L11c. Enable HDMI output, bridge and corresponding
>>> DSI output.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Venkata Prahlad Valluru <quic_vvalluru@...cinc.com>
>>> ---
>>> v3: - Updated commit text
>>>      - Arranged nodes in alphabetical order
>>>      - Fixed signoff
>>>      - Fixed drive strength for lt9611_irq_pin
>>>      - Removed 'label' from hdmi-connector, which is optional
>>
>> Please respond to each Bjorn comment and explain how did you implement it...
>>
> 
> Yes, agreed. Even though it seems like you mostly just agreed to mine 
> and Bjorn's suggestions and decided to implement all those in v3 , it 
> would have been better to explicitly ack them or tell why you agreed or 
> what went wrong that you had not done it in v2 itself to close the loop.

The problem is that one or more were ignored... By responding to each of
them, I hope they will be finally read and understood instead of
repeating the same mistake three times.

Best regards,
Krzysztof