From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 412C6C433EF for ; Thu, 3 Mar 2022 09:52:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230044AbiCCJxW (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Mar 2022 04:53:22 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:38306 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229929AbiCCJxV (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Mar 2022 04:53:21 -0500 Received: from mail-wr1-x42f.google.com (mail-wr1-x42f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42f]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B76441602 for ; Thu, 3 Mar 2022 01:52:34 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-x42f.google.com with SMTP id b5so6929457wrr.2 for ; Thu, 03 Mar 2022 01:52:34 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to; bh=7sxk0gi7K/gEPgkPAW86oNPcDC6UYWLnAgn9FQdwzh8=; b=F5JReUMm+aE6eQqymlEbM8qe/PfH788Ia/OqOdM3zvOQl6r4RpguDVY6lVDA80nPLm 9ylhE1F/YS+V57bge3B+5sHZtsug09u16n/uMDHMusPZ/Mztwa7r8Gvn5zqumWhA5eyM HLeSyjzc8J63VyymRjLNpr286C3U0vFqVCZXz/hA5AdQTU2muMWegRQWyIwLIPzTkgtC gkgapOHzZ6KVwMLPX4/hlhc4ePUCxhm/Rw6n+RHBIVp9v3vqQ0xZqoHQ/PJ4lV/zjKml q1EU2irWgkLP1+9NvTvSy9gEWBnJq7xp6/k9ftVzU6HchuxSBA9XyKLP+gMq+L+67MEf 7aNw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to; bh=7sxk0gi7K/gEPgkPAW86oNPcDC6UYWLnAgn9FQdwzh8=; b=Jfj2K/QhXCM2Hce7GRWGG31No0QDKi34qeqDvUX1qzQ6XNLnDUQVy6vKs/36vsXXDR JaRqBbwoDl9FBsgPG+7stQjAuiXnHIZ7EklekK63pnszH1V8EeEBEfgN8JMq0C215Y0a dZuTqG2CaFemsAbX//2uapeZKlPshHsAktrKSUy5BA9CikzkHaD42G9P9/D8dHAUUFz4 so2MWvdYaOVI3osinZcIbzPlFO62uqEabZFK9cWm5PTrzHSH5tOvv1I3IxALrQRoNgHB z8araMYp0C2kYx1Vt+TSuskEPZDx0K+7UlVzHAaJfAN2tkDSaW+wn/G2hTrfk0DXK+0G hIAw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5313HjZtvcXcFro/iDoX0CaWSCOySQQxpwoJaATCABlM1rkUgs8O s2rauSQhhTVCQIOUP6RwhjTh6w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzSz7co5Gr4DzCxUOVBx6L6Q21HdHmiiy260WjUtW/O3KRGZ7JP0MFsCyGruqP65XknqhA0Zw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:2ca:b0:1f0:46a2:bd63 with SMTP id o10-20020a05600002ca00b001f046a2bd63mr4170886wry.140.1646301153045; Thu, 03 Mar 2022 01:52:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from google.com (cpc155339-bagu17-2-0-cust87.1-3.cable.virginm.net. [86.27.177.88]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l16-20020a05600c1d1000b003816edb5711sm8807931wms.26.2022.03.03.01.52.32 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 03 Mar 2022 01:52:32 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2022 09:52:30 +0000 From: Lee Jones To: Dan Carpenter Cc: Caleb Connolly , Bjorn Andersson , Jonathan Cameron , Lars-Peter Clausen , Rob Herring , Andy Gross , Stephen Boyd , linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, sumit.semwal@linaro.org, amit.pundir@linaro.org, john.stultz@linaro.org, kernel test robot Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 2/9] mfd: qcom-spmi-pmic: expose the PMIC revid information to clients Message-ID: References: <20220221220743.541704-1-caleb.connolly@linaro.org> <20220221220743.541704-3-caleb.connolly@linaro.org> <20220225090452.GP3943@kadam> <20220225094024.GQ3943@kadam> <20220303090549.GM2812@kadam> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20220303090549.GM2812@kadam> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 03 Mar 2022, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Thu, Mar 03, 2022 at 02:20:58AM +0000, Caleb Connolly wrote: > > > > > > On 25/02/2022 09:40, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > > On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 09:23:24AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > On Fri, 25 Feb 2022, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 08:50:43AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 24 Feb 2022, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon 21 Feb 16:07 CST 2022, Caleb Connolly wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Some PMIC functions such as the RRADC need to be aware of the PMIC > > > > > > > > chip revision information to implement errata or otherwise adjust > > > > > > > > behaviour, export the PMIC information to enable this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is specifically required to enable the RRADC to adjust > > > > > > > > coefficients based on which chip fab the PMIC was produced in, > > > > > > > > this can vary per unique device and therefore has to be read at > > > > > > > > runtime. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [bugs in previous revision] > > > > > > > > Reported-by: kernel test robot > > > > > > > > Reported-by: Dan Carpenter > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This says is that "kernel test robot" and Dan reported that something > > > > > > > needed to be fixed and this patch is the fix for this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So even though their emails asks for you to give them credit like this > > > > > > > you can't do it for new patches. > > > > > > > > > > > > Right, or else you'd have to give credit to anyone who provided you > > > > > > with a review. This could potentially grow to quite a long list. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I always feel like people who find crashing bugs should get credit but > > > > > no credit for complaining about style. It's like we reward people for > > > > > reporting bugs after it gets merged but not before. > > > > > > > > > > We've had this debate before and people don't agree with me or they say > > > > > that it's fine to just include the Reported-by kbuild tags and let > > > > > people figure out from the context that probably kbuild didn't tell > > > > > people to write a new driver. > > > > > > > > Reviews will often consist of both style and logic recommendations. > > > > If not spotted and remedied, the latter of which would likely result > > > > in undesired behaviour a.k.a. bugs. So at what point, or what type of > > > > bug would warrant a tag? > > > > > > > > > > If it's a crash or memory leak. Style comments and fixing typos are > > > their own reward. Basically it's the same rule as Fixes tags. We > > > shouldn't use Fixes tags for typos. > > > > Hi Dan, > > > > How (if at all) would you like me to reference the bug reported by LKP > > in my next revision of this patch? It doesn't seem like a fixed conclusion > > was reached here. > > > > It seems like Reported-by doesn't really represent things well, perhaps we > > could try for "Bugchecked-by" or something like that? > > Just leave it out. Those are automated emails and I just look them > over and hit forward or delete. > > The thing is that I've been arguing for a new Fixes-from: tag since > before the kbuild-bot existed and on the last kernel summit email list > someone said to just use Reported-by so I've been trying to help people > consider that as an option... Nothing wrong with using Reported-by if located chronologically and annotated correctly. Example was provided in a previous mail. -- Lee Jones [李琼斯] Principal Technical Lead - Developer Services Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog