linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] dt-bindings: mfd: add lubbock-io binding

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]

Message-ID: <20150119083533.GF21886@x1>
Date:	Mon, 19 Jan 2015 08:35:33 +0000
From:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
To:	Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@...e.fr>
Cc:	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	Daniel Mack <daniel@...que.org>,
	Haojian Zhuang <haojian.zhuang@...il.com>,
	Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <dbaryshkov@...il.com>,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] dt-bindings: mfd: add lubbock-io binding

On Fri, 16 Jan 2015, Robert Jarzmik wrote:

> Add a binding for lubbock motherboard IO board.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@...e.fr>
> ---
>  .../devicetree/bindings/mfd/lubbock-io.txt         | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 26 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/lubbock-io.txt
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/lubbock-io.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/lubbock-io.txt
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..33c9e21
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/lubbock-io.txt
> @@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
> +Intel's pxa255 system development platform motherboard.

s/pxa25/PXA25/

"system development platform motherboard" doesn't quite sit right with me.

How about "Intel Xscale PXA255 development platform (Lubbock)"?

> +This is the motherboard, or IO board, of the pxa25x development system,
> +supporting a lubbock pxa25x SoC board.

Again, this sounds weird.

> +Required properties:
> +  - compatible : One of the following chip-specific strings:
> +        "intel,lubbock-io"

An odd thing to say with only one entry.

Also, please line it up to the right of the ':' above.

> +  - interrupts : The first interrupt is the line the /IRQ signal the IO board
> +                 multiplex is connected to. The only known case is GPIO0 on the
> +                 pxa25x SoC.

Can you get someone to help you re-word this into a more fluid
sentence?

> +Optional properties:
> +  - interrupts : The second optional interrupt is the base of the interrupts
> +                 multiplexed by the lubbock motherboard. If unspecified, the
> +                 range is fully dynamic, and the irqdomain will generate its
> +                 interrupt base on the fly.
> +
> +Example:
> +
> +mb: lubbock-mb@0 {
> +	compatible = "intel,lubbock-io";
> +	interrupts = <0 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_FALLING 400 IRQ_TYPE_NONE>;
> +	#interrupt-cells = <2>;
> +        interrupt-parent = <&pxairq>;

Whitespace error.

> +};

I'm guessing mb means motherboard?  I think it's unusual for a
motherboard to have it's own driver.  Usually we provide drivers for
the individual components/peripherals situated on the board.

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
--
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/