linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 04/12] i2c: rtl9300: use regmap fields and API for registers

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: <29683d52-8e5a-4217-a32b-c2248319f69a@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2025 10:04:07 +0200
From: Jonas Jelonek <jelonek.jonas@...il.com>
To: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>
Cc: Chris Packham <chris.packham@...iedtelesis.co.nz>,
 Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Markus Stockhausen
 <markus.stockhausen@....de>, Sven Eckelmann <sven@...fation.org>,
 Harshal Gohel <hg@...onwunderlich.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 04/12] i2c: rtl9300: use regmap fields and API for
 registers

On 26.09.25 08:47, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> Hi Jonas,
>
>> I just noticed that it seems like an already applied patch got lost [1].
>> This was supposed to be merged to Andi's i2c/i2c-host [2] and actually was
>> there until the first three patches of this series got merged.
>>
>> Since I had already issue a few days ago trying to rebase the remaining
>> patches, this might be the cause it also fails for you?
> True. This patch somehow got lost and doesn't apply cleanly anymore
> because of patch 3 of this series.
>
> Are open to resend this series, rebased and with the lost patch added?

Sure, I'll send out an updated series later this day.

The lost patch doesn't apply cleanly anymore because my patch 3 was altered
in a wrong way while Andi resolved a conflict, which occured because the
now-lost patch wasn't in the fixes path. To be accurate, this probably needs
another patch also for the stable path.

> Thanks for the pointer,
>
>    Wolfram
>

Best,
Jonas Jelonek