On Fri, Dec 01, 2023 at 10:31:22AM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 01, 2023 at 09:32:46AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On 30/11/2023 18:32, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > > The PM8921 is an SSBI PMIC but in the binding example it is described
> > > as being part of an SPMI PMIC while using an SSBI address.
> > >
> > > Make the example consistent by using the sibling PM8941 SPMI PMIC
> > > instead.
> > >
> > > Fixes: 8138c5f0318c ("dt-bindings: rtc: qcom-pm8xxx-rtc: Add qcom pm8xxx rtc bindings")
> >
> > Similarly to your thermal patch - this is just an example, not a
> > binding. No bugs are fixed here, no need for backports.
>
> A Fixes tag does not in itself imply that something should be
> backported, we have CC-stable tags for that.
IDK, I think at this point every highly active kernel developer should
be aware that the stable maintainers backport way more than just what
gets explicitly CCed to stable.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
