linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] counter: stm32-timer-cnt: Use TIM_DIER_CCxIE(x) instead of TIM_DIER

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: <cgtiizodhbyutaeu2kw5qszb6ap6bpzdk5pnpurliikhz4isvp@3xtidwcttjkb>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2024 21:43:26 +0200
From: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...libre.com>
To: Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>, William Breathitt Gray <wbg@...nel.org>
Cc: Fabrice Gasnier <fabrice.gasnier@...s.st.com>, 
	Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>, Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>, 
	linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org, linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com, 
	linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thorsten Scherer <T.Scherer@...elmann.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] counter: stm32-timer-cnt: Use TIM_DIER_CCxIE(x)
 instead of TIM_DIER_CCxIE(x)

Hello,

On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 10:56:15PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 06:38:38PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > Which patches need to be in the pull-request and which can be hoovered
> > up by their associated subsystems?
> 
> The dependencies are as follows:
> 
> 	#1 <- #2 <- #3 <- #4
> 	       ^
> 	      #5
> 
> So the practical options are (in the order of my not very strong preference):
> 
>  - Immutable branch with #1 - #4 (assuming William is ok to let you
>    merge #3), and then I can add #5 (and further work on the pwm-stm32
>    driver that I'm currently working on). Maybe William even doesn't
>    need to pull; I didn't check.
> 
>  - Immutable branch with only #1 and #2. Then William can pull and add
>    #3 and I can pull and add #5. #4 can be applied later then.
>    (I can remind about #4 in the next cycle.)
> 
>  - Immutable branch with #1 - #5
>    (Reminder: In that case please fixup the pwm patch's short log with
>    s/-/: /)
>    I would add this for sure to the pwm tree. I didn't even try to check
>    if it's needed for mfd and/or counter. So if you don't need it, I
>    volunteer to create that branch, but if you want to do it, that's
>    just fine, too.

I wonder what's the state here. Maybe Lee waiting for William to send an
Ack that Lee can do the first option?

Best regards
Uwe

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)