linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] arm64: dts: rockchip: Move uart5 pin configuration to SoM dtsi

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: <2d80ae4a-f836-4492-997c-69dac32be41b@cherry.de>
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2025 10:36:15 +0100
From: Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@...rry.de>
To: Lukasz Czechowski <lukasz.czechowski@...umatec.com>,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, robh@...nel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org,
 conor+dt@...nel.org, heiko@...ech.de, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] arm64: dts: rockchip: Move uart5 pin configuration to
 SoM dtsi

Hi Lukasz,

On 1/21/25 10:22 AM, Lukasz Czechowski wrote:
> In the PX30-uQ7 (Ringneck) SoM, the hardware CTS and RTS pins for
> uart5 cannot be used for the UART CTS/RTS, because they are already
> allocated for different purposes. CTS pin is routed to SUS_S3#
> signal, while RTS pin is used internally and is not available on
> Q7 connector. Move definition of the pinctrl-0 property from
> px30-ringneck-haikou.dts to px30-ringneck.dtsi.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Czechowski <lukasz.czechowski@...umatec.com>

Reviewed-by: Quentin Schulz <quentin.schulz@...rry.de>

Considering that I'll request the next patch to be backported to stable 
releases, we should probably backport this one as well to avoid a git 
conflict?

c.f. 
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html#select-the-recipients-for-your-patch

Essentially: Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org

@Heiko, this one patch isn't really a genuine candidate for stable 
backport as it's just moving things around but it'll result in a git 
conflict when backporting the other patch, how is it usually done for 
stable releases?

Thanks!
Quentin