linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V3 1/4] dt-bindings: mmc: sdhci-msm: Add sm8750 compatible

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: <6a2c593a-20b5-462f-bb6a-7d51dad1eb75@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2025 08:08:38 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Sarthak Garg <sarthak.garg@....qualcomm.com>,
 Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
 <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
 Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
 quic_nguyenb@...cinc.com, quic_rampraka@...cinc.com,
 quic_pragalla@...cinc.com, quic_sayalil@...cinc.com,
 quic_nitirawa@...cinc.com, quic_bhaskarv@...cinc.com, kernel@....qualcomm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/4] dt-bindings: mmc: sdhci-msm: Add sm8750 compatible

On 10/11/2025 07:47, Sarthak Garg wrote:
> 
> On 10/27/2025 8:00 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 26/10/2025 12:17, Sarthak Garg wrote:
>>> Document the compatible string for the SDHCI controller on the
>>> sm8750 platform.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Sarthak Garg <sarthak.garg@....qualcomm.com>
>>> Acked-by: Rob Herring (Arm) <robh@...nel.org>
>>> ---
>>
>>
>> Why are you sending third time the same, even though this was applied
>> long time ago at v1? Please do not send unnecessary patches, this just
>> clutters people's mailboxes.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Krzysztof
> 
> 
> I had assumed that we need to repost the entire patch series regardless 
> of whether some patches were already ACKed or applied. I’ll make sure to 

Why? What sort of documentation ever suggested sending things which are
applied? What sort of logic drives it?

Best regards,
Krzysztof