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:
 <DU0PR04MB941706D2E6FA25AD23B4863C88F82@DU0PR04MB9417.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 00:49:13 +0000
From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
To: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
CC: "Peng Fan (OSS)" <peng.fan@....nxp.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

Hi Sudeep,

> 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.

Thanks for your suggestion.  I tried to do different implementations that
could make all of us agree, so it was indeed many versions with different
implementations. Sorry. I will improve.

BTW: would you please also give an ACK for patch 3, because patch 3 uses
module_scmi_driver?

Thanks,
Peng.

> 
> --
> Regards,
> Sudeep