linux-kernel - Re: (subset) [PATCH v6 0/6] OpenRISC de0 nano single and multicore boards

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: <aWonvu4xgqIGBGmI@antec>
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2026 11:57:50 +0000
From: Stafford Horne <shorne@...il.com>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@....qualcomm.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux OpenRISC <linux-openrisc@...r.kernel.org>,
	devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: (subset) [PATCH v6 0/6] OpenRISC de0 nano single and multicore
 boards

On Thu, Jan 15, 2026 at 04:40:53PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 15:09:56 +0000, Stafford Horne wrote:
> > Since v5:
> >  - Adjust dt-binding patch based on suggestions from Geert and Krzysztof.
> >  - Add reviewed-by's on the dt-binding patch.
> > Since v4:
> >  - Rebased the series on linux-next to allow patches to be incremental.
> >  - Rewrote the dt-bindings patch as an incremental patch, Due to this I
> >    dropped reviewed-by's.
> >  - Added acked-by to the IPI fix patch.
> > Since v3:
> >  - Switch order of gpio-mmio driver and bindings patches to patch binding
> >    first before driver.  Suggested by Krzysztof.
> >  - Removed example form binding suggested by Krzysztof.
> >  - Added Reviewed-by's from Geert and Linus W.
> > Since v2:
> >  - Fixup (replace) gpio-mmio patch to update driver compatible list and just add
> >    opencores,gpio to mmio-gpio bindings.  Discussed with Geert and Linus W
> >    because the 8-bit opencores,gpio is not the same as the 32-bit broadcom
> >    chip. [1].
> >  - Update new device trees to use proper ordering, remove debug options, remove
> >    unneeded "status" properties.  Suggested by Geert.
> > Since v1:
> >  - Use proper schema in gpio-mmio suggsted by Conor Dooley
> >  - Remove 0 clock-frequency definitions in dtsi file
> > 
> > [...]
> 
> Applied, thanks!
> 
> [1/6] dt-bindings: gpio-mmio: Correct opencores GPIO
>       commit: b2b8d247ad8ee1abe860598cae70e2dbe8a09128
> [2/6] gpio: mmio: Add compatible for opencores GPIO
>       commit: 3a6a36a3fc4e18e202eaf6c258553b5a17b91677

Thanks, now that these commits are on gpio-next I would like to apply the rest
of the patches to my openrisc/for-next branch.  Since the other patches depend
on the GPIO patches for system functionality, do you think it would be safe for
me to merge the gpio-next branch into my branch?

It seems a bit messy, Maybe I should just wait for the next cycle.  But if you
have any suggestions of experience with this any comments would be appreciated.

-Stafford