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: <acfe6acb-725a-4e62-9b82-35a887a3813b@roeck-us.net>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2024 06:28:38 -0700
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
 Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>,
 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>, 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

On 8/12/24 06:13, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 12/08/2024 14:21, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>>
>>> 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.
> 
> No, it's not. It was just a ping. The issue is here not describing
> dependency, allowing Guenter to take the patch and not even telling him

Oh, I knew that the i2c patches were not yet in the tree. I just didn't
know that I must not apply patches in this situation (where the actual
patches are perfectly fine but assume that something else completely elsewhere
is applied). After all, the amc6821 patches do not actually trigger anything
in i2c mux, they just trigger instantiation of nested devices.

We live and learn. Patches now dropped from linux-next.
I do wonder though if the rules for applying a sequence of patches with
non-technical dependencies is documented somewhere.

Thanks,
Guenter