linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] pinctrl: scmi: support i.MX95 OEM extensions with fsl,pins property

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: <Zl3LKRE-PT3u1AX7@bogus>
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2024 14:54:49 +0100
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
Cc: "Peng Fan (OSS)" <peng.fan@....nxp.com>,
	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
	Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>,
	Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
	Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
	Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Aisheng Dong <aisheng.dong@....com>, Jacky Bai <ping.bai@....com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"imx@...ts.linux.dev" <imx@...ts.linux.dev>,
	"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] pinctrl: scmi: support i.MX95 OEM extensions with
 fsl,pins property

On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 08:36:27AM +0000, Peng Fan wrote:
> Hi Linus, Sudeep, Cristian,
> 
> > Subject: [PATCH 0/3] pinctrl: scmi: support i.MX95 OEM extensions with
> > fsl,pins property
> 
> Sorry if this is an early ping to you. Just wanna this not blocking i.MX95
> upstream support.
>

I would say yes as this was posted bang in the middle of the merge window.
So it is possible for people to miss this if they are busy otherwise.

I wouldn't have responded in general or if someone is new to the Linux
kernel development. But you are no new to kernel development.

In general I also have a suggestion for you. Avoid churning the dependent
patch series if the base set of patches are not yet reviewed or agreed upon.
I was super confused with the amount of different concurrent but dependent
patch series you had for this whole i.MX SCMI pinmux support. I had ignored
and not responded in the past but thought it would be good to respond in
this thread.

--
Regards,
Sudeep