linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/7] includes: dt-bindings: Rename STM32F429 pinctrl DT bindings

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 7 Jun 2017 18:35:48 +0200
From:   Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...com>
To:     Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
CC:     Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>, <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/7] includes: dt-bindings: Rename STM32F429 pinctrl DT
 bindings

Hi Rob,

Gentle ping.

On 04/12/2017 03:31 PM, Alexandre Torgue wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
> On 04/10/2017 10:27 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 07, 2017 at 02:43:00PM +0200, Alexandre TORGUE wrote:
>>> STM32F4 MCU series is composed of several SOC (STM32F429, STM32F469,
>>> ...).
>>> Most of muxing definition are identical. So to avoid to duplicate
>>> bindings
>>> definition, this patch create common definitions.
>>
>> This is a lot of churn. Some confirmation that the resultant dtb is the
>> same before and after would be nice. Perhaps the script you used to
>> convert this as well.
>
> I tried to use fdtdump but it seems bugged. So I used directly dtc
> binary to (re)generate dts files (before and after apply the series) and
> I compared "pinmux" field in both case.
>
> Example on stm32f469-disco:
>
> ./scripts/dtc/dtc -I dtb -O dts -o stm32f469-disco-after.dts
> stm32f469-disco-after.dtb
>
> ./scripts/dtc/dtc -I dtb -O dts -o stm32f469-disco-before.dts
> stm32f469-disco-before.dtb
>
> cat stm32f469-disco-after.dts | grep pinmux
> cat stm32f469-disco-before.dts | grep pinmux
>

Do you agree with verifications ?

> regards
> alex
>
>>
>> Rob
>>