On 06/11/2023 18:05, Elliot Berman wrote: > > > On 11/5/2023 5:03 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 03/11/2023 23:52, Elliot Berman wrote: >>> From: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> SM8450's PRNG does not require a core clock reference. Add a new >>> compatible with a qcom,prng-ee fallback and handle that. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Acked-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Signed-off-by: Elliot Berman <quic_eberman@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> I noticed this patch got missed while running make dtbs_check. No >>> changes to this patch from the original version: >>> >>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/2c208796-5ad6-c362-dabc-1228b978ca1d@xxxxxxxxxx/ >>> >> >> I don't understand why do you send this. This is not a correct patch, >> was rejected. Different patch was already merged. > > I see that 6.6 has > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sm8450.dtsi?h=v6.6#n1741 > > but bindings not updated: > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/qcom,prng.yaml?h=v6.6 > > I came up with similar-ish fix offline, then found Konrad had posted the patch when searching lore. > I didn't find any other patch on lore. > > I think you rejected a proposal to drop "p" from "prng", but this patch > doesn't do that and we stayed course with naming scheme. Please start working on linux-next, not on the last kernel release. Best regards, Krzysztof
