netdev - Re: [PATCH] DT: net: renesas,ravb: document R8A77980 bindings

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: <20180226.151051.1415982763959063184.davem@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 26 Feb 2018 15:10:51 -0500 (EST)
From:   David Miller <davem@...hat.com>
To:     horms@...ge.net.au
Cc:     sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        mark.rutland@....com, linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] DT: net: renesas,ravb: document R8A77980 bindings

From: Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2018 11:58:24 +0100

> On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 09:53:17PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
>> Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2018 21:01:15 +0300
>> 
>> > On 02/01/2018 11:13 PM, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
>> > 
>> >> Renesas R-Car V3H (R8A77980) SoC has the R-Car gen3 compatible EtherAVB
>> >> device, so document the SoC specific bindings.
>> >> 
>> >> Signed-off-by: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
>> >> 
>> >> ---
>> >> The patch is against DaveM's 'net-next.git' repo but I wouldn't mind if it's
>> >> applied to 'net.git' instead. :-)
>> > 
>> >    David, I see this patch was marked as "not applicable" in patchwork. Why, because
>> > it was posted during the merge window?
>> 
>> No because I thought the relevant architecture tree would take a mere
>> DT update.
> 
> Hi Dave,
> 
> I am happy to take these kinds of changes for the ravb and sh_eth drivers
> if that is your preference. I am also just as happy for you to take them,
> which I think has been the case for similar changes in the past.

No, it's not a problem.  Applied to 'net', thanks.