linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5] ASoC: dt-bindings: omap-mcpdm: Convert to DT schema

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: <760012df-5b16-4cc6-b2e5-0a05294f6000@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 22 May 2024 16:15:44 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Mithil <bavishimithil@...il.com>
Cc: Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
 Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Lopez Cruz <misael.lopez@...com>,
 linux-sound@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] ASoC: dt-bindings: omap-mcpdm: Convert to DT schema

On 22/05/2024 15:46, Mithil wrote:
>> You are not making it easier for us to review:
>> ====
>> b4 diff '<20240522075245.388-1-bavishimithil@...il.com>'
>> Grabbing thread from
>> lore.kernel.org/all/20240522075245.388-1-bavishimithil@...il.com/t.mbox.gz
>> Checking for older revisions
>> Grabbing search results from lore.kernel.org
>>   Added from v4: 2 patches
>> ---
>> Analyzing 15 messages in the thread
>> WARNING: duplicate messages found at index 1
>>    Subject 1: ASoC: dt-bindings: omap-mcpdm: Convert to DT schema
>>    Subject 2: ASoC: dt-bindings: omap-mcpdm: Convert to DT schema
>>   2 is not a reply... assume additional patch
>> Preparing fake-am for v4: ASoC: dt-bindings: omap-mcpdm: Convert to DT
>> schema
>> ERROR: Could not fake-am version v4
>> ---
>> Could not create fake-am range for lower series v4
>>
>> ====
>>
> Hey, sorry about it, its my first time with lkml, could you explain
> what seems to be the issue here?

You sent multiple same versions, I think more than one v4. You can try
by yourself - does b4 work on this patchset?

Best regards,
Krzysztof