linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: mvebu: Fix missing binding documentation for Armada 38x

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, 20 Jun 2014 14:52:41 -0400
From:	Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>
To:	Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@...e-electrons.com>
Cc:	Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
	Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com>,
	Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com>,
	Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel.garcia@...e-electrons.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: mvebu: Fix missing binding documentation for
 Armada 38x

On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 06:40:43PM +0200, Gregory CLEMENT wrote:
> For the Armada 380 and Armada 385 SoCs, the common bindings for those
> 2 SoCs, was forgotten. This patch add the documentation for the
> marvell,aramda38x property.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@...e-electrons.com>
> --
> Hi,
> 
> This fix should be merged in 3.16. For 3.15 I am not sure as it is not
> a regression.
> 
> Changelog:
> v1->v2
> 
> - Reformulate to make clear that we will need marvell,armada38x _and_ a
> SoC specific string. For consistency I duplicated what we have done in
> armada-370-xp.txt
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Gregory
> 
> 
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/armada-38x.txt | 17 +++++++++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/armada-38x.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/armada-38x.txt
> index 11f2330a6554..fa08760046df 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/armada-38x.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/armada-38x.txt
> @@ -6,5 +6,18 @@ following property:
>  
>  Required root node property:
>  
> - - compatible: must contain either "marvell,armada380" or
> -   "marvell,armada385" depending on the variant of the SoC being used.
> +compatible: must contain "marvell,armada38x"

I agree with Sergei on this one.  We generally avoid wildcards in
compatible strings.  Is there a use case where specifying one of the
below wouldn't be sufficient?

> +
> +In addition, boards using the Marvell Armada 380 SoC shall have the
> +following property:
> +
> +Required root node property:
> +
> +compatible: must contain "marvell,armada380"
> +
> +In addition, boards using the Marvell Armada 385 SoC shall have the
> +following property:
> +
> +Required root node property:
> +
> +compatible: must contain "marvell,armada385"

thx,

Jason.
--
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/