netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/4] dt-bindings: net: dsa: realtek: describe LED usage

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2024 23:10:52 -0300
From: Luiz Angelo Daros de Luca <luizluca@...il.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>, Alvin Šipraga <alsi@...g-olufsen.dk>, 
	Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>, 
	Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, 
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, 
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/4] dt-bindings: net: dsa: realtek: describe LED usage

Hi Krzysztof,

> >>
> >>> +
> >>> +            patternProperties:
> >>> +              '^led@[a-f0-9]+$':
> >>
> >> [0-3]
> >
> > leds are already defined for a port. I'm just trying to add a
> > restriction to allow only 0-3 leds and use that to identify the group.
>
> Where is the restriction, in your original patch?

I tried to limit the led index to [0-3] (from the original
'^led@[a-f0-9]+$') and reg also to [0-3] (originally not constrained).

>
> > These suggestions will redefine the leds property, forcing me to
>
> How? I really do not see it.

I thought it was including the previous object definition when I
mentioned the same property again. However, the
"unevaluatedProperties: false" made it clear that it is actually
replacing the previous declaration. Sorry for my lack of experience.

> > declare #address-cells, #size-cells for leds and reference the led
> > schema in led@[0-3]. Is there a way to just add a constraint to what
> > is already present?
>
> I don't follow.

I would like to somehow add a restriction without replacing the
existing subnode definition. I'm not sure if the YAML scheme can
modify an heritaged sub-sub-property without redefining it all over
again or if the parent object requires a specific subobject property.
Anyway, the discussion ended up concluding that it was not worth it to
add such complexity for this situation.

Thank you for your time.

>
> >
> >>
> >>> +                type: object
> >>> +                additionalProperties: true
> >>
> >> This cannot be 'true'. Which then will point you to errors and missing
> >> ref to leds schema and need to use unevaluatedProperties: false.
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>

Regards,

Luiz