linux-kernel - Re: (subset) [PATCH v13 0/7] spacemit: introduce P1 PMIC support

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: <20250916130553-GYC1255161@gentoo.org>
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2025 21:05:53 +0800
From: Yixun Lan <dlan@...too.org>
To: Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Alex Elder <elder@...cstar.com>,
	lgirdwood@...il.com, alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com, robh@...nel.org,
	krzk+dt@...nel.org, conor+dt@...nel.org, mat.jonczyk@...pl,
	paul.walmsley@...ive.com, palmer@...belt.com, aou@...s.berkeley.edu,
	alex@...ti.fr, linux.amoon@...il.com, troymitchell988@...il.com,
	guodong@...cstar.com, linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
	spacemit@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: (subset) [PATCH v13 0/7] spacemit: introduce P1 PMIC support

Hi Mark, Jones,

On 13:27 Tue 16 Sep     , Lee Jones wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Sep 2025, Mark Brown wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 09:42:29AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > On Thu, 11 Sep 2025, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 11:36:41AM -0500, Alex Elder wrote:
> > 
> > > > > How should these two patches be merged?  Mark has reviewed the
> > > > > regulator patch 3 and Alexandre has acked the RTC patch 4.
> > 
> > > > We'd both have been expecting them to go via MFD.
> > 
> > > Why?  I don't see any dependencies between them (usually a shared MFD
> > > header-file).  If there are no deps, it should be taken through its own
> > > repo, no?
> > 
> > I used to just apply things but at some point Linus complained about
> > cases where the MFD ended up not getting merged (missing the merge
> > window or whatever) so I've been treating them like they had an actual
> > dependency.
> 
> Not sure I've seen any of that from Linus, but I don't doubt you.  The
> MFD part has been merged now, so it's save to go ahead and apply the
> Regulator part.
> 

Forgive me to chim in..

To be honest, I don't really mind which tree the patch to go through.. 

But since the patch 3 has no build time dependency on previous two,
so it should be fair to take via pmu/regulator tree, I've done a check
locally which imply this..

What do you think, Mark?

-- 
Yixun Lan (dlan)