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:	Tue, 11 Nov 2014 16:00:15 +0100
From:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:	Soren Brinkmann <soren.brinkmann@...inx.com>
Cc:	Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Alessandro Rubini <rubini@...pv.it>,
	Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>,
	Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
	linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org,
	"linux-sh@...r.kernel.org" <linux-sh@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] pinctrl: zynq: Document DT binding

On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 8:05 PM, Soren Brinkmann
<soren.brinkmann@...inx.com> wrote:

> Add documentation for the devicetree binding for the Zynq pincontroller.
>
> Signed-off-by: Soren Brinkmann <soren.brinkmann@...inx.com>
(...)
> +Example:
> +       pinctrl0: pinctrl@700 {
> +               compatible = "xlnx,pinctrl-zynq";
> +               reg = <0x700 0x200>;
> +               syscon = <&slcr>;
> +
> +               pinctrl_uart1_default: pinctrl-uart1-default {
> +                       common {
> +                               groups = "uart1_10_grp";
> +                               function = "uart1";
> +                               slew-rate = <0>;
> +                               io-standard = <1>;
> +                       };

I don't really like that you mix multiplexing and config in the
same node. I would prefer if the generic bindings say we have
muxing nodes and config nodes, and those are disparate.

Can't you just split this:

common-mux {
    groups = "uart1_10_grp";
    function = "uart1";
};

common-config {
    groups = "uart1_10_grp";
    slew-rate = <0>;
    io-standard = <1>;
};

That way we can identify nodes as mux nodes (have "function")
or config nodes (have "groups" or "pins" but not "function") which
I think makes things easier to read.

Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists