linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] dt-bindings: memory: mediatek: Add mt8188 SMI reset control binding

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <2iqqjryrwimu4hi3sgdmujc6g3qxehruxxs32k33nmgle3wl67@bcz4ahhqt724>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2024 10:05:12 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: "friday.yang" <friday.yang@...iatek.com>, 
	Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, 
	Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>, 
	AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>
Cc: Yong Wu <yong.wu@...iatek.com>, Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>, 
	linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, Project_Global_Chrome_Upstream_Group@...iatek.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] dt-bindings: memory: mediatek: Add mt8188 SMI reset
 control binding

On Wed, Aug 21, 2024 at 11:28:17AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 21/08/2024 10:26, friday.yang wrote:
> > To support SMI clamp and reset operation in genpd callback, add
> > SMI LARB reset register offset and mask related information in
> > the bindings. Add index in mt8188-resets.h to query the register
> > offset and mask in the SMI reset control driver.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: friday.yang <friday.yang@...iatek.com>
> > ---
> >  .../bindings/reset/mediatek,smi-reset.yaml    | 46 +++++++++++++++++++
> >  include/dt-bindings/reset/mt8188-resets.h     | 11 +++++
> 
> Also, your patches did not reach DT patchwork, so something is odd.
> Maybe they got flagged as spam? Please investigate with your IT
> department. In case it keeps missing patchwork, they won't be tested by
> automation and I will generally ignore them (not apply). :(

Update: they reached now, so maybe this was some Patchwork issue. You
still can double check that you send patches correctly.

Best regards,
Krzysztof