linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH v2] documentation/devicetree: Move DT bindigns from gpio to watchdog

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, 28 Aug 2013 17:01:12 +0200
From:	Johannes Thumshirn <johannes.thumshirn@....de>
To:	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
CC:	Johannes Thumshirn <johannes.thumshirn@....de>,
	Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@...rix.com>,
	Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ana.be>,
	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
	<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH v2] documentation/devicetree: Move DT bindigns from
 gpio to watchdog

On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 08:38:56AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 08/28/2013 12:22 AM, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 03:41:42PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
> >> On 08/27/2013 05:10 AM, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> >>> I accidently put the devicetree bindings for the MEN A21 watchdog driver in
> >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/gpio instead of
> >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/watchdog, this patch addresses this error.
> >>
> >>>  Changes to v1:
> >>>  - Use named gpios, as suggested by Stephen Warren
> >>
> >> The move and the change to the binding should probably be separate
> >> patches since they're logically separate things. I didn't intend you to
> >> update the rename patch to fix the binding issue I pointed out.
> >>
> >
> > Oops. Looks like I've misunderstood you there. I'll re-send the rename patch
> > then.
> >
> >> Is the driver updated for this binding change? Are there DTs in released
> >> kernels that won't work now, or is the driver very new; there may be a
> >> need for the driver to support the old binding and the binding doc to
> >> document the old gpios property, but mark it deprecated.
> >
> > The driver is not yet updated, this is why I've sent it as an RFC. Are the
> > bindings acceptable this way? If yes I'll update the driver and re-send the
> > bindings with the driver as a new patch series.
>
> Well, XXX says:
>
> > GPIO properties should be named "[<name>-]gpios"
>
> whereas in this patch, some of the renamed properties were "-gpio"
> rather than "-gpios". Aside from that, the new binding looks reasonable.
>
> However, I see that the existing binding will be released as part of
> v3.11. That implies that we should continue to support the old binding
> for compatibility. As such, I'm not convinced whether it's worth
> changing this binding now.

Well I'm be perfectly happy with not changing the bindings and therefore not
changing the driver. If this O.K. for you.

Should I resend my 1st patch, or is it O.K. to pick up the old one?

Johannes
--
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/