linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/8] mfd: Add atmel-st driver

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: <20150120153632.GA13701@x1>
Date:	Tue, 20 Jan 2015 15:36:32 +0000
From:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
To:	Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>
Cc:	Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>,
	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
	Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>,
	Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard <plagnioj@...osoft.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
	Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ana.be>,
	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/8] mfd: Add atmel-st driver

On Tue, 20 Jan 2015, Alexandre Belloni wrote:

> On 20/01/2015 at 09:47:39 +0000, Lee Jones wrote :
> > > > This driver looks pretty pointless.  Why can't you request the sysconf
> > > > registers from within the drivers themselves?
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > How would you probe the watchdog driver then? Would you had the
> > > "atmel,at91rm9200-st" compatible there?
> > > 
> > > At some point in time, we should add the reset driver, would you also
> > > match it on "atmel,at91rm9200-st"?
> > > 
> > > I'm fine with that as this allows to avoid the mfd driver.
> > 
> > I'm sorry, I don't follow.  Why can't each driver have their own
> > compatible strings?
> > 
> 
> The same IP provides a clocksource, a watchdog and is also the reset
> controller. I think that the DT guidelines requires that the DT
> describes the hardware and so use one compatible for that IP;

Not to my knowledge.  There are lots of single chip devices which have
multiple compatible strings.  What's stopping you from representing
this device under the syscfg node?

-- 
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/