linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/5] dt-bindings: arm: Add Coresight device Trace NOC definition

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: <71cab81f-90ad-4965-b3fc-26d72afeabc5@quicinc.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2025 15:29:54 +0800
From: Yuanfang Zhang <quic_yuanfang@...cinc.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
        Suzuki K Poulose
	<suzuki.poulose@....com>,
        Mike Leach <mike.leach@...aro.org>,
        James Clark
	<james.clark@...aro.org>,
        Alexander Shishkin
	<alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>
CC: <kernel@...cinc.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <coresight@...ts.linaro.org>, <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <kernel@....qualcomm.com>, <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] dt-bindings: arm: Add Coresight device Trace NOC
 definition



On 2/26/2025 7:07 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 26/02/2025 11:52, Yuanfang Zhang wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2/22/2025 6:47 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 21/02/2025 08:40, Yuanfang Zhang wrote:
>>>> Adds new coresight-tnoc.yaml file describing the bindings required
>>>> to define Trace NOC in the device trees.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Yuanfang Zhang <quic_yuanfang@...cinc.com>
>>>
>>>
>>> So you just sent the same v1, ignoring previous review. That's not how
>>> it works.
>>>
>> sorry for this incorrect process. because i just update --to-cc list and no other
>> change, i forced the version to V1, hoped it would work like resend,
>> but the result was not as expected.
> 
> 
> But you got feedback, so why resending without implementing it? That's
> the problem, not you labeled/not-labeled it as resend.
> 
got it, will implement it in next patch.
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof