linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC v2 5/5] spmi: document the PMIC arbiter SPMI 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:	Fri, 23 Aug 2013 15:55:56 -0600
From:	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
To:	Josh Cartwright <joshc@...eaurora.org>
CC:	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@...rix.com>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
	Sagar Dharia <sdharia@...eaurora.org>,
	Gilad Avidov <gavidov@...eaurora.org>,
	Michael Bohan <mbohan@...eaurora.org>,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 5/5] spmi: document the PMIC arbiter SPMI bindings

On 08/09/2013 02:37 PM, Josh Cartwright wrote:

Patch description?

> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spmi/qcom,spmi-pmic-arb.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spmi/qcom,spmi-pmic-arb.txt

> +Required properties:
> +- compatible : should be "qcom,spmi-pmic-arb".
> +- reg-names  : should be "core", "intr", "cnfg"

> +- reg : offset and length of the PMIC Arbiter Core register map.
> +- reg : offset and length of the PMIC Arbiter Interrupt controller register map.
> +- reg : offset and length of the PMIC Arbiter Configuration register map.

This seems like it's defining the "reg" property 3 times each with a
different meaning. It'd be better to say something like:

reg : register specifier. Must contain 3 entries, in the following
order: core registers, interrupt register, configuration registers.

> +	qcom,spmi@...c0000 {
...
> +		qcom,pm8841@4 {

Node names typically don't include a vendor prefix. For the first
instance above, I think just "spmi@...c0000" or even just "spmi" would
be appropriate here; the latter being best in the case where there's
only 1 SPMI controller and hence no need to include the unit address for
uniqueness.

--
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/