linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] dt-bindings: phy: axiado,ax3000-emmc-phy: add Axiado eMMC PHY

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: <3a8c3091-f8b3-406c-b4e3-431336b08825@axiado.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2026 18:27:16 +0800
From: Tzu-Hao Wei <twei@...ado.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc: SriNavmani A <srinavmani@...ado.com>,
 Prasad Bolisetty <pbolisetty@...ado.com>, Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>,
 Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
 <conor+dt@...nel.org>, linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, openbmc@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] dt-bindings: phy: axiado,ax3000-emmc-phy: add Axiado
 eMMC PHY

On 1/12/2026 4:34 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
> 
> 
>> You did not bother to test your code...
> 
> And this is not even v1, but v2 and you completely ignored that part.
> 
> So did you implement any previous feedback?
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof

Sorry for the confusion.

All of your previous feedback was implemented. I missed one YAML change
when preparing the resend, which made it look like the feedback was
ignored.

My original intent was:
- resend the eMMC host series as v2 with the PHY driver removed, and
- submit the eMMC PHY as a separate v1 thread.

However, due to the mistake above, this was not communicated clearly and
the versioning caused confusion.

I understand this is frustrating. I will resend with correct versioning,
explicitly list the addressed feedback, and include clear testing details
to avoid any ambiguity.

Thanks for your patience.

Best regards,
TH