Re: [PATCH] mmc: sdhci-esdhc-imx: improve ESDHC_FLAG_ERR010450

[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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxxxxxxx/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