linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 0/2] Add `devm_dma_request_chan()` to simplify probe path in atmel-quadspi.c

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <9d384301-3f73-4120-a82b-580eb5f1a4ed@prolan.hu>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2025 11:26:57 +0200
From: Csókás Bence <csokas.bence@...lan.hu>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC: <dmaengine@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, "Vinod
 Koul" <vkoul@...nel.org>, Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com>,
	Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>, Claudiu Beznea
	<claudiu.beznea@...on.dev>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, "Tudor
 Ambarus" <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/2] Add `devm_dma_request_chan()` to simplify probe
 path in atmel-quadspi.c

Hi,

On 2025. 05. 15. 11:22, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2025 at 11:14:22AM +0200, Csókás Bence wrote:
>> On 2025. 05. 15. 10:45, Mark Brown wrote:
> 
>>> I can't tell what the plan is here, or what the status is for the first
>>> patch (since I'm not CCed).  The second patch depends on a new API
>>> introduced in the first patch so it can't be merged independently.
> 
>> Yes, the situation is a bit convoluted. Obviously 2/2 will be applied after
>> 1/2, in a similar vein than the former PM series.
> 
>> So what I was trying to say: Vinod should be able to apply 1/2 to his branch
>> (dma/next) right now, which can then be merged to spi/for-next. This merged
>> branch should be able to then cleanly apply 2/2.
> 
> I wouldn't expect to pull the whole DMA tree in, that'll have a huge
> amount of extra stuff in it - if I was going to pull something I'd
> expect a topic branch. 

Fair point.

> Wouldn't it be simpler for me to just apply both
> patches at this point if there's no conflicts with the DMA tree?  We're
> at -rc6 now...

That also works for me. I should send 1/2 to you as well, correct?

Bence