linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] spi/s3c64xx: Update DT binding documentation to match code

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20140309084309.GS28112@sirena.org.uk>
Date:	Sun, 9 Mar 2014 08:43:09 +0000
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	Charles Keepax <ckeepax@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc:	ks.giri@...sung.com, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi/s3c64xx: Update DT binding documentation to match
 code

On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 09:19:08AM +0000, Charles Keepax wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 10:48:41AM +0800, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 06, 2014 at 05:05:39PM +0000, Charles Keepax wrote:

> > > It updated the device tree binding to require a "cs-gpio" property to be
> > > specified on the spi controller node if chip selects will be given as
> > > GPIOs per slave, rather than the controller having a dedicated internal
> > > chip select pin.

> > No, it doesn't - it's saying that if the device has a "cs-gpio" property
> > then to use that as the chip select.  It's not a boolean, it's a GPIO
> > specifier.  Looking at the code it looks like the intention is to search
> > all children for a cs-gpio during the controller probe, it's possible
> > that this isn't working correctly.

> That is basically part of my question is the current setup doing
> what it is intended to? The Samsung binding has controller-data
> blocks on each of the slaves that specify the gpio for that
> slave.

Right, which is also clearly the intention of the code.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)