linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: sprd: Remove unused and undocumented "constant_charge_voltage_max

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: <3b448717-b6ec-498b-bb0d-5f2e2a4fc528@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2024 11:21:57 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Chunyan Zhang <zhang.lyra@...il.com>
Cc: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>,
 Stanislav Jakubek <stano.jakubek@...il.com>, robh@...nel.org,
 conor+dt@...nel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, orsonzhai@...il.com,
 Cixi Geng <cixi.geng@...ux.dev>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: sprd: Remove unused and undocumented
 "constant_charge_voltage_max_microvolt" property

On 21/11/2024 04:04, Chunyan Zhang wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof,
> 
> On Wed, 20 Nov 2024 at 22:25, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 20/11/2024 13:27, Baolin Wang wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2024/11/20 20:14, Stanislav Jakubek wrote:
>>>> Hi Rob,
>>>>
>>>> constant-charge-voltage-max-microvolt is a valid property, which I assume
>>>> was the original intention here. I've already submitted a patch changing this
>>>> to the documented property:
>>>>
>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/aa557091d9494fdaa3eda75803f9ea97014c8832.1730918663.git.stano.jakubek@gmail.com/
>>>>
>>>> Baolin also reviewed that patch... make of that what you will.
>>>
>>> Ah, yes. Sorry I forgot your patch. Thanks for reminding.
>>
>> No one picked them up... I kept Stanislav's patches in my incoming/inbox
>> folder for quite long time, because I pick up some random fixes here and
>> there, but then forgot them and did not apply for v6.13-rc1. So they
>> missed v6.13-rc1.
>>
>> I am not the maintainer of that platform, so I don't care about it
>> really, but I care about contributors work not being lost/ignored.
>>
>> What is the plan with these and all other Spreadtrum patches? Are they
>> going to be applied by you or other Spreadtrum maintainers? Do you need
>> any help from us? Or maybe some clarifications of the process?
> 
> Yes we need your help!
> 
> The Spreadtrum DTS patches had been being maintained through my tree.
> I'm not suitable to do this any more due to some changes (I've moved
> myself to the reviewer entry of sprd).
> 
> After discussion with other sprd maintainers, we still want the
> Spreadtrum patches to go through your tree if you agree.

+Cc Arnd,

With few folks we talked briefly on IRC, but that probably missed some
audience. I was indeed taking orphaned fixes, not only for Spreadtrum
but also other trees, but that's different than maintaining. I don't
feel comfortable taking any features or making any maintenance decisions
about Spreadtrum, so I should not be listed in MAINTAINERS file. If I am
not listed there, it is likely I will miss patches, so me picking up
fixes here solves current issue, but does not really solve the problem
long term.

If there is no one willing to handle patches for Spreadtrum, maybe the
platform's status should be changed from Maintained to "Odd Fixes"?

Best regards,
Krzysztof