linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: Tree for Jul 29 (BACKLIGHT

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: <B2E29C08-674C-4D8A-B187-7F6A6B5DC76F@infradead.org>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2025 09:05:52 -0700
From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
To: Duje Mihanović <duje@...emihanovic.xyz>,
 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
 Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
CC: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 Linux DRI Development <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
 linux-leds@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Jul 29 (BACKLIGHT_KTD2801)

On July 29, 2025 2:18:16 AM PDT, "Duje Mihanović" <duje@...emihanovic.xyz> wrote:
>On Tuesday, 29 July 2025 10:32:13 Central European Summer Time Randy Dunlap 
>wrote:
>> so BACKLIGHT_KTD2801 should:
>> 	depends on GPIOLIB
>
>Sounds good to me.
>
>> Also, in drivers/leds/Kconfig, does it need duplicate entries for this?
>> Can't the second entry be removed?
>> (asking since Duje made both entries)
>
>That's an oversight on my end, and as such the second one (the one inside the 
>"if NEW_LEDS" block) should be removed.
>
>Would you like me to send a patch to fix these?

Yes, please. 
Thanks. 



~Randy