Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 17 Aug 2023 18:44:04 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] mmc: sdhci-esdhc-imx: improve ESDHC_FLAG_ERR010450 | From | Giulio Benetti <> |
| |
Hello Ulf,
On 16/08/23 23:36, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On Wed, 16 Aug 2023 at 19:14, Giulio Benetti > <giulio.benetti@benettiengineering.com> wrote: >> >> Hello Ulf, and All, >> >> +Cc Andrew Lunn, >> >> On 16/08/23 11:52, Ulf Hansson wrote: >>> On Fri, 11 Aug 2023 at 23:49, Giulio Benetti >>> <giulio.benetti@benettiengineering.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Errata ERR010450 only shows up if voltage is 1.8V, but if the device is >>>> supplied by 3v3 the errata can be ignored. So let's check for if quirk >>>> SDHCI_QUIRK2_NO_1_8_V is defined or not before limiting the frequency. >>>> >>>> Sponsored by: Tekvox Inc. >>> >>> Didn't know we have this kind of tag. Can you point me to the >>> documentation of it? >> >> I've been pointed by Andew Lunn almost the same question here: >> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/859ff6a9-3ba9-ea2e-7b85-01813c5df0dd@broadcom.com/t/ >> >> and also asked to update: >> Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst >> >> I've taken inspiration by this commit: >> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=73c289bac05919286f8c7e1660fcaf6ec0468363 >> >> where there is "Sponsored by:" and not "Sponsored-by:" otherwise >> checkpatch.pl script complains about it. >> >> Other commits already have that sort of tag. > > Yes, but that seems silly to me. > > We should not be using tags in this way. First there needs to be an > agreement of what kind of tags we should allow in the commit messages, > before we start using them. > >> >> I could add Sponsored-by tag documentation and in checkpatch.pl script >> as well as other possible scripts where required as pointed by Andrew. >> >> I think this is a good way to give credits to companies that sponsor >> patches and it could be more interesting for companies in general to >> pay someone to upstream patches because they have their name on it. >> Otherwise it's not an everyday task to add a driver from scratch >> and write in the top comment that is sponsored by some company. >> Also now there is SPDX so that part would be dropped too. >> >> What do you All think about this? Do I go for a RFC patchset to add >> the Sponsored-by: tag? > > My opinion is just one voice here, so at this point it doesn't really > matter what I think. > > If *you* think this is a good idea, I encourage you to submit an RFC > to the kernel docs for this. In this way we can collect the comments > and see if people think this is a good idea.
Ok, I will go with a RFC soon,
> That said, do you want me to apply $subject patch without the tag or > would you rather proceed with submitting an RFC first?
It would be great if you can apply the patch without the tag please.
Thank you Best regards -- Giulio Benetti CEO&CTO@Benetti Engineering sas
| |