linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCHv3 3/6] clk: Add TI-Nspire clock drivers

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]

Message-Id: <F8915E01-0FCA-4C9F-8440-63B5A73B349B@gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 19 May 2013 21:09:17 +1000
From:	Daniel Tang <dt.tangr@...il.com>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux@....linux.org.uk,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	"fabian@...ter-vogt.de Vogt" <fabian@...ter-vogt.de>,
	Lionel Debroux <lionel_debroux@...oo.fr>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Mike Turquette <mturquette@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCHv3 3/6] clk: Add TI-Nspire clock drivers


On 16/05/2013, at 10:17 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:

> On Thursday 16 May 2013, Daniel Tang wrote:
>> 
>> On 16/05/2013, at 12:07 AM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
>> 
>>> You are missing a binding in Documentation/devicetree, same as for some of
>>> the other drivers in this series.
>> 
>> Should we be adding a vendor prefix to it too? If so, we're not sure whether
>> to use "ti," or not since this isn't an official port by TI.
> 
> The binding describes the hardware, it should not matter who does the port.
> However, any part of the tree that is not actually from TI should have a
> vendor prefix indicating who made that part. IIRC, the SoC used in there
> is from TI, so you should use something else for the on-soc components.
> 

If the vendors for the on-SOC components are unknown, should we just leave the compatible strings as is (i.e. "nspire-XXX")?

>>> It seems strange to assign the clk_name variable to node->name
>>> first and then overriding it with the clock-output-names property.
>>> Is that intentional? If so, please explain it in a comment.
>>> 
>> 
>> I copied that bit of boilerplate from drivers/clk/clk-fixed-rate.c but
>> I'm guessing it's to use the node name as the clock name unless there
>> is a property called "clock-output-names"
> 
> Ah, I see. It seems you forgot to add the clock maintainer to Cc in the
> mail. Mike is the one who will have to take you patch anyway, so I assume
> he will comment on this if you did it wrong.
> 
> 	Arnd

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/