From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.andi.de1.cc (mail.andi.de1.cc [178.238.236.174]) (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 D237F211A1E; Fri, 2 May 2025 12:54:39 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=178.238.236.174 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1746190482; cv=none; b=AvSeRhMkrIbryT303F56W3mUagfwdQUWOVjyOowwGDzw22xReuhZ95ZJI9mpNQ8ZWHggtZO0TkBxQL7Es4h8fkSWQuOKwJVtS1rDS1uJcyZaCeCcffA4DHSVFWgzw77SrMxmmtDPlKmmSSzL3ExfB4vn1McD0wDcHmNEDYF0kCA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1746190482; c=relaxed/simple; bh=0S4njLBx477UY0EGQFCzlms0FZEfXroNv1KmF3jVh3w=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=jcqItCZuKJ5rs3HYwS+jjY/GzZ+uxUS7F2u6x4wpmrzdVMGpxcm9rleZt7EgWQjBxId+OC2erzRvgN4oJAdlNcK8MYjOkaoNCZRQ5PIMiBYXHLx3pQWnr2xD9QYc8g0047Wo8MWqiKeAcCBbYNQGuJEV7ixKZpZhBZ104nzIwS8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=kemnade.info; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kemnade.info; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kemnade.info header.i=@kemnade.info header.b=tefFsVbb; arc=none smtp.client-ip=178.238.236.174 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=kemnade.info Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kemnade.info Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kemnade.info header.i=@kemnade.info header.b="tefFsVbb" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kemnade.info; s=20220719; h=References:In-Reply-To:Cc:From:Sender:Reply-To: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID; bh=fdclFqSEaIk6BP0kwR3B1xdvCQwhZtNIC8kiyckL4fw=; b=tefFsVbbmieIaZxr6uA2/anU1g k5v7LsaWGOffxM3gI22D/S19P9jGpatY0I/0oZwayz6xjHv/6xUm0WltatFayDFTdKe1OwucSY1OS 57MlVNPgsFcgJpfsHEYztOTk/I5iZ5Av7I3Q3/n/zxTEa1AdvOBRLDrsmJDSmOaM6JHt2SjnR1BZh i5afFoydi+2HqxggIxX0YtqnCou8R5FlDgpQCRfmDvvSz7qK+CdZRaREeCVAHsDWueArLBGt+Cz2k eg2CRZgqPXJx4JeLpHwMlj2sXdp3dhgnbT9mpQWGY7f2Wik9JZnmMzkYM8EFdQEF8OR/RLenGr4x4 hucT8ymg==; Date: Fri, 2 May 2025 14:54:20 +0200 From: Andreas Kemnade To: Andi Shyti Cc: Johan Hovold , Johan Hovold , Vignesh R , Aaro Koskinen , 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: <20250502145420.6bca53f9@akair> In-Reply-To: References: <20250415075230.16235-1-johan+linaro@kernel.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.1.1 (GTK 3.24.38; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Am Tue, 29 Apr 2025 15:10:13 +0200 schrieb Andi Shyti : > Hi Johan, > > 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. > hmm, some issue new in -rc1 could be fixed in a later -rcX. I have seen a lot of typos and other minor stuff getting fixed that way. So it does not need to be backported to any stable/longterm tree at all. Are the rules for that really that tough as for stable trees? I really doubt. Regards, Andreas