linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 0/4] iio: accel: sca3000: simplify by using newer infrastructure

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: <CANZih_S=7-ArpBT3NF54-RH_KYER=mdS9nf1bUO3djEiDY_RWQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2025 00:03:37 -0300
From: Andrew Ijano <andrew.ijano@...il.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>, jic23@...nel.org, andrew.lopes@...mni.usp.br, 
	gustavobastos@....br, dlechner@...libre.com, nuno.sa@...log.com, 
	andy@...nel.org, jstephan@...libre.com, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/4] iio: accel: sca3000: simplify by using newer infrastructure

On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 12:23 PM Andy Shevchenko
<andriy.shevchenko@...el.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 03:20:06PM -0300, Andrew Ijano wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 2:41 PM Andy Shevchenko
> > <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 09:24:19AM -0300, Andrew Ijano wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 2:56 AM Andy Shevchenko
> > > > <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 6:17 AM Andrew Ijano <andrew.ijano@...il.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The sca3000 driver is old and could be simplified by using newer
> > > > > > infrastructure.
> > > > >
> > > > > I haven't found any reference to a base commit here. Have you
> > > > > forgotten to use --base when preparing the series?
> > > > > In any case, please clarify what this series is based on.
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for pointing this out! I think I forgot to use --base for
> > > > it. In this case, should I submit a new version of the whole patchset
> > > > with this information or is there a better way to do it?
> > >
> > > For now just reply here what is the base. I asked this question above.
> >
> > Ok! No problem. So the base for this patchset is the commit
> > 3c23416f69f2870bea83697d7ab03c6a8497daa7.
>
> No such commit in the repository. :-(
> You are doing something interesting here [1].
>
> So, make sure you are based on the iio/testing or so, make sure that the base
> commit is the one that may be found on git.kernel.org. Use that in the next
> version. Due to above this version is ambiguous to even start reviewing it.
>
> [1] I have connected IIO subsystem as a remote, so I have access to many trees
> from kernel.org (but not to all of them).
>

Hi, Andy. Sorry for the late response.

Actually, I think I didn't fully understand this part of the
contribution process and that's what was causing confusion.
Basically, the base commit appeared in the previous version of this
patchset but I removed it after it was approved, to prevent it from
being reviewed again. However, I think I could just add the
reviewed-by tag.

I'll send a next version with other corrections and the missing commit
based on iio/testing.

Thanks,
Andrew