From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8753C1F7580; Mon, 5 May 2025 10:00:13 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1746439213; cv=none; b=SMK5xMFgwzKVDcfSN3BCgMeQue0NtPt6n4zfyqhcp7H+kmme7OBZZRQTzqeCm0taiygc8OExpaPRLxUgnd9IqoPE1ueqD+J8tidOn8lu6heMy5BDkPyzKuKKbLBNMmhBTK9y0Cdcm/TgWIEX7vmbeBoovzYTezUQIOV1Lmx4Ik8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1746439213; c=relaxed/simple; bh=FRuf5HxXYzqbfy/RUvMEK/inDPxU9w9/ccNfofTTt/k=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=i4864rtkXVMXQuE+xujIM6d38d0Qics7YORjEqwSBl6N9O/wMsAG6VVWr1GE2meXCdTcWWOKBmKfvV6O3yWnrrQxKEAb0kWlxSLpVE1AzTvDSXsaOKhj+CVG9KdIKO+T8NEPHKftN2rryobCM3SMRljMTDdjD+HPrqHT/anWAS4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=IIwW5rwV; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="IIwW5rwV" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F0997C4CEE4; Mon, 5 May 2025 10:00:12 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1746439213; bh=FRuf5HxXYzqbfy/RUvMEK/inDPxU9w9/ccNfofTTt/k=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=IIwW5rwVPrNTtiP0ofBDyXZNRZiVT5pSEc4KBGVD0mn+LdPDS8pTKaep1q9yFc2P+ WKgTMvWCMy/i+1Cz2O3qLNjRnmoMDBmjU/LYW1wBudC5QMfBQIPpuKUvZRADJoC93w pI77gm48N82opgZrsBxqpHyND2FCcZ4GZAa9O4hxlHgQytKbRyW5PdbN75BRSAtpg+ iKRo5Fet+dik+AqV6JuWilVRsPof1/IBMwBRTnTFbRg2S+0ICUm2hiMhfbyu+bpVqg MRKkZ0Ww4kmZIyS5k0Tf7bb+744BvgPBMFIGnlM/G5B0OKJMosA+s50RTXNshp7yw0 y2U8L/Rx7LYQw== Received: from johan by xi.lan with local (Exim 4.97.1) (envelope-from ) id 1uBscJ-000000003oT-36GC; Mon, 05 May 2025 12:00:07 +0200 Date: Mon, 5 May 2025 12:00:07 +0200 From: Johan Hovold To: Andi Shyti Cc: Johan Hovold , Vignesh R , Aaro Koskinen , Andreas Kemnade , Kevin Hilman , Roger Quadros , Tony Lindgren , Janusz Krzysztofik , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jayesh Choudhary Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: omap: fix deprecated of_property_read_bool() use Message-ID: References: <20250415075230.16235-1-johan+linaro@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Tue, Apr 29, 2025 at 03:10:13PM +0200, Andi Shyti wrote: > On Fri, Apr 18, 2025 at 11:57:57AM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 17, 2025 at 11:41:51PM +0200, Andi Shyti wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 15, 2025 at 09:52:30AM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote: > > > > Using of_property_read_bool() for non-boolean properties is deprecated > > > > and results in a warning during runtime since commit c141ecc3cecd ("of: > > > > Warn when of_property_read_bool() is used on non-boolean properties"). > > > > > > > > Fixes: b6ef830c60b6 ("i2c: omap: Add support for setting mux") > > > > Cc: Jayesh Choudhary > > > > Signed-off-by: Johan Hovold > > > > > > Thanks for your patch! I'm going to drop the Fixes tag, as this > > > isn't really a bug fix but rather a warning suppression during > > > boot time. > > > > Thanks, but I think you should have kept the Fixes tag and merged this > > for 6.15 (i2c-host-fixes) since this is a new warning in 6.15-rc1 (and > > that does warrant a Fixes tag). Perhaps I should have highlighted that > > better. > > > > If the offending patch had been posted or merged before such uses > > started generating warnings in 6.14-rc1 then that would have been a > > different matter. > > I'm sorry, but as I understand it, the Fixes tag should be used > only when an actual bug is being fixed. I've seen stable > maintainers getting annoyed when it's used for non-bug issues. You seem to confuse the Fixes tag with a CC stable tag. A Fixes tag is used to indicate which commit introduced an issue, while the CC stable tag is used to flag a commit for backporting (and the fact that autosel tends to pick up patches with just a Fixes doesn't change this). It's perfectly fine to fix an issue and use a Fixes tag when doing so even if the fix itself does not qualify for backporting (for whatever reason). > The system works perfectly fine even with the warning printed. > It might confuse CI systems, but that shouldn't really be our > concern. You should not knowingly be introducing new warnings. The Fixes tag I added showed that this was an issue introduced in 6.15-rc1, and, unless discovered really late in the cycle, it should be fixed before 6.15 is out. Johan