linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] arm64: dts: exynosautov920: add watchdog DT node

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: <5ac02c0e-d245-4c05-a4df-2cd2ba9065ad@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2024 08:50:20 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: 김태완 <trunixs.kim@...sung.com>,
 'Wim Van Sebroeck' <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>,
 'Guenter Roeck' <linux@...ck-us.net>, 'Rob Herring' <robh@...nel.org>,
 'Krzysztof Kozlowski' <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
 'Conor Dooley' <conor+dt@...nel.org>, 'Alim Akhtar' <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>
Cc: linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, 'Byoungtae Cho' <bt.cho@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] arm64: dts: exynosautov920: add watchdog DT node

On 11/12/2024 02:50, 김태완 wrote:
> on 11/12/2024 01:50 UTC+09:00, Taewan Kim wrote:
>>> From: Byoungtae Cho <bt.cho@...sung.com>
>>>
>>> Adds two watchdog devices for ExynosAutoV920 SoC.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Byoungtae Cho <bt.cho@...sung.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Taewan Kim <trunixs.kim@...sung.com>
>>> ---
>>>  .../arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynosautov920.dtsi | 20 +++++++++++++++++++
>>>  1 file changed, 20 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynosautov920.dtsi
>> b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynosautov920.dtsi
>>> index c759134c909e..7b9591255e91 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynosautov920.dtsi
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/exynos/exynosautov920.dtsi
>>> @@ -183,6 +183,26 @@ cmu_misc: clock-controller@...20000 {
>>>  				      "noc";
>>>  		};
>>>
>>> +		watchdog_cl0: watchdog@...60000 {
>>
>> You need to do careful rebase, not just accept whatever tools shown you.
>>
>> This is now placed in incorrect order - not keeping sorting by unit address.
> 
> I seems to me that the addresses are sorted correctly in order. 
> Could you kindly check again?
> 
>         clock-controller@...2_0000
>                   watchdog@...6_0000 
>                   watchdog@...7_0000
>     interrupt-controller@...0_0000
> 
> And if there are any rules I might not be aware of, please let me know.


You are right, I got impression last was 1004, but that's 1040. Thanks
for correcting me. I applied now.


Best regards,
Krzysztof