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  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:	Tue, 7 Oct 2014 09:31:31 -0700
From:	Guenter Roeck <>
To:	Rob Landley <>
	Rob Herring <>,
	Pawel Moll <>,
	Mark Rutland <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/44] mfd: as3722: Drop reference to pm_power_off from
 devicetree bindings

On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 11:21:11AM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> On 10/07/14 00:28, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > Devicetree bindings are supposed to be operating system independent
> > and should thus not describe how a specific functionality is implemented
> > in Linux.
> So your argument is that linux/Documentation/devicetree/bindings should
> not be specific to Linux. Merely hosted in the Linux kernel source
> repository.
> Well that's certainly a point of view.
Not specifically my argument, really, and nothing new either. But, yes, I do
think that devicetree bindings descriptions should not include implementation
details, especially since those may change over time (as is the case here).

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists