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: Fri, 24 May 2024 19:27:54 +0100
From: Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
To: Julien Panis <jpanis@...libre.com>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
	AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
	Nicolas Pitre <npitre@...libre.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>, Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/6] dt-bindings: thermal: mediatek: Rename thermal
 zone definitions for MT8186 and MT8188

On Fri, May 24, 2024 at 07:24:47PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Fri, May 24, 2024 at 11:04:34AM +0200, Julien Panis wrote:
> > Use thermal zone names that make more sense.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Julien Panis <jpanis@...libre.com>
> 
> Removing the defines is an ABI break. If these are all the same devices,
> but with more accurate naming, then keep the old defines and add new
> ones. However, the GPU1 define changes in the course of this patch which
> is more problematic.

> > [RFC] When PATCH 1/6 and 2/6 are squashed, checkpatch raises this WARNING:
> > "DT binding docs and includes should be a separate patch." That's why I
> > split them in this v5. The problem is that the driver can't be compiled
> > any more at PATCH 1/6. It needs PATCH 2/6 to be compiled. Should the
> > checkpatch warning be ignored here ? Should I finally squash PATCH 1/6
> > and PATCH 2/6 ?

Heh, and there's just one of the issues caused by your ABI break...

> Why do these names even make more sense? Where did the old names come
> from and where do the new?


Thanks,
Conor

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

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ