linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/4] dt-bindings: Update iProc GPIO bindings

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:	Thu, 14 Apr 2016 09:38:12 -0500
From:	Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To:	Ray Jui <ray.jui@...adcom.com>
Cc:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
	bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] dt-bindings: Update iProc GPIO bindings

On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 05:15:22PM -0700, Ray Jui wrote:
> Update the iProc GPIO binding document to introduce a new compatible
> string "brcm,iproc-gpio-only", that allows the generic pinconf function
> to be disabled completely
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ray Jui <ray.jui@...adcom.com>
> Reviewed-by: Jon Mason <jon.mason@...adcom.com>
> Reviewed-by: Scott Branden <scott.branden@...adcom.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/brcm,iproc-gpio.txt | 7 +++++--
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/brcm,iproc-gpio.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/brcm,iproc-gpio.txt
> index ddaa1b0..75a4370 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/brcm,iproc-gpio.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/brcm,iproc-gpio.txt
> @@ -3,8 +3,11 @@ Broadcom iProc GPIO/PINCONF Controller
>  Required properties:
>  
>  - compatible:
> -    Must be "brcm,cygnus-ccm-gpio", "brcm,cygnus-asiu-gpio",
> -    "brcm,cygnus-crmu-gpio" or "brcm,iproc-gpio"
> +    For Cygnus, it must be brcm,cygnus-ccm-gpio", "brcm,cygnus-asiu-gpio", or
> +"brcm,cygnus-crmu-gpio"
> +    For non-Cygnus iProc SoCs, it must be either "brcm,iproc-gpio-only" (if
> +only GPIO is supported) or "brcm,iproc-gpio" (if both generic pinconf and GPIO
> +are supported)

No. That's not how compatible strings work. Use SoC specific compatible 
strings if you need to distinguish this.

Rob