linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 16/21] dt-bindings: spi: document support for SA8255p

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: <ce4d6ea9-0ba7-4587-b4a7-3dcb2d6bb1a6@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2024 16:09:19 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Nikunj Kela <quic_nkela@...cinc.com>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: andersson@...nel.org, konradybcio@...nel.org, robh@...nel.org,
 krzk+dt@...nel.org, conor+dt@...nel.org, rafael@...nel.org,
 viresh.kumar@...aro.org, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, davem@...emloft.net,
 sudeep.holla@....com, andi.shyti@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
 will@...nel.org, robin.murphy@....com, joro@...tes.org,
 jassisinghbrar@...il.com, lee@...nel.org, linus.walleij@...aro.org,
 amitk@...nel.org, thara.gopinath@...il.com, broonie@...nel.org,
 cristian.marussi@....com, rui.zhang@...el.com, lukasz.luba@....com,
 wim@...ux-watchdog.org, linux@...ck-us.net, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org,
 arm-scmi@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, iommu@...ts.linux.dev,
 linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org,
 kernel@...cinc.com, quic_psodagud@...cinc.com,
 Praveen Talari <quic_ptalari@...cinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 16/21] dt-bindings: spi: document support for SA8255p

On 05/09/2024 16:03, Nikunj Kela wrote:
> 
> On 9/5/2024 1:04 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 04/09/2024 23:06, Nikunj Kela wrote:
>>> On 9/4/2024 9:58 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>>>>> Sorry, didn't realize SPI uses different subject format than other
>>>>> subsystems. Will fix in v3. Thanks
>>>> Each subsystem is free to use its own form. e.g for netdev you will
>>>> want the prefix [PATCH net-next v42] net: stmmac: dwmac-qcom-ethqos:
>>> of course they are! No one is disputing that.
>>>> This is another reason why you should be splitting these patches per
>>>> subsystem, and submitting both the DT bindings and the code changes as
>>>> a two patch patchset. You can then learn how each subsystem names its
>>>> patches.
>>> Qualcomm QUPs chips have serial engines that can be configured as
>>> UART/I2C/SPI so QUPs changes require to be pushed in one series for all
>>> 3 subsystems as they all are dependent.
>> No, they are not dependent. They have never been. Look how all other
>> upstreaming process worked in the past.
> 
> Top level QUP node(patch#18) includes i2c,spi,uart nodes.
> soc/qcom/qcom,geni-se.yaml validate those subnodes against respective
> yaml. The example that is added in YAML file for QUP node will not find
> sa8255p compatibles if all 4 yaml(qup, i2c, spi, serial nodes) are not
> included in the same series.
> 

So where is the dependency? I don't see it. Anyway, if you insist,
provide reasons why this should be the only one patchset - from all
SoCs, all companies, all developers - getting an exception from standard
merging practice and from explicit rule about driver change. See
submitting bindings.

This was re-iterated over and over, but you keep claiming you need some
sort of special treatment. If so, please provide arguments WHY this
requires special treatment and *all* other contributions are fine with it.

Best regards,
Krzysztof