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: <eaca7890-af22-4913-9758-53846ad1ec79@linux.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2024 11:48:34 +0200
From: Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@...ux.intel.com>
To: Shyam Sundar S K <Shyam-sundar.S-k@....com>,
 Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>
Cc: Sanket.Goswami@....com, linux-i3c@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] i3c: dw: Add support for AMDI0015 ACPI ID

Hi

On 11/12/24 10:48 AM, Shyam Sundar S K wrote:
>> Am I right this and patch 5/5 can be independent from rest of the series?
> 
> Right. 1/5 and 5/5 can be grouped. But rest of the other patches are
> equally important because they drive the usecase.
> 
>>
>> To me it looks these two patches enable bus communication and thus be
>> useful without rest of the series while latter need more discussion
>> (I'll have some notes coming) and Cc'ing linux-acpi.
> 
> I have Cc'ed linux-acpi in this revision. Do you have any feedback for
> patches 2-4 ?
> 
Yes, I'm reviewing them and only the patch 2/5 was Cc'ed to linux-acpi.

Patchset split would serve better in my opinion enabling basic 
communication and have an other set concentrating more complex scenario 
we were try to get input from ACPI folks.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ