netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 net-next/devicetree 0/5] DT bindings for Felix DSA switch on LS1028A

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]

Date:   Mon, 24 Feb 2020 16:48:27 +0800
From:   Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>
To:     Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next/devicetree 0/5] DT bindings for Felix DSA
 switch on LS1028A

On Mon, Feb 24, 2020 at 09:59:53AM +0200, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> Hi Shawn,
> 
> On Mon, 24 Feb 2020 at 08:32, Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 05:12:54PM +0200, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > > From: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
> > >
> > > As per feedback received in v1, I've changed the DT bindings for the
> > > internal ports from "gmii" to "internal". So I would like the entire
> > > series to be merged through a single tree, be it net-next or devicetree.
> >
> > Will applying the patches via different trees as normal cause any
> > issue like build breakage or regression on either tree?  Otherwise, I do
> > not see the series needs to go in through a single tree.
> >
> > Shawn
> >
> 
> No, the point is that I've made some changes in the device tree
> bindings validation in the driver, which make the driver without those
> changes incompatible with the bindings themselves that I'm
> introducing. So I would like the driver to be operational on the
> actual commit that introduces the bindings, at least in your tree. I
> don't expect merge conflicts to occur in that area of the code.

The dt-bindings patch is supposed to go through subsystem tree together
with driver changes by nature.  That said, patch #1 and #2 are for
David, and I will pick up the rest (DTS ones).

Shawn