linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 2/8] i2c: muxes: add support for tsd,mule-i2c multiplexer

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: <Zrn-ZkgYKVquarDX@ninjato>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2024 14:21:58 +0200
From: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc: Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@...rry.de>,
	Farouk Bouabid <farouk.bouabid@...rry.de>,
	Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>,
	Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.com>,
	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
	Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/8] i2c: muxes: add support for tsd,mule-i2c
 multiplexer

> Yep, but to be fair the patchset did not say anything about
> dependencies. There is absolutely nothing in cover letter, nothing in
> the patches, so I do not wonder that this mishap happened.

Still, one shouldn't take DT patches (which are even the last ones in
this series) until all other patches are at least in -next, or? Yes,
mistakes happen, so no big deal, but i2c is not to blame IMHO.

> Depends whether you rely on being CC-ed here. Existing entries do not

I don't rely on CC. I rely on patches being on the i2c list.

> include you, thus you are not cc-ed on maintainers. Peter Rosin is, but
> it seems Peter does not apply patches. It could be intentional, but then
> I understand that all pings should go to Peter?

Once Peter acks, I apply. He is the maintainer. Yet, he is very busy, so
I also apply when someone else I trust does a review. He is fine with
that and might chime in later, if needed. This patch here did not get
any review, sadly. As I said, resource problem. That being said, these
patches are somewhere on my todo list if nobody else steps up (what I
would prefer). But please, don't put pressure on me (or any other
potential reviewer) just because DT patches ended up upstream too early.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)