linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] iio: sun4i-lradc: Add binding documentation

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: <20160702134617.GC4604@lukather>
Date:	Sat, 2 Jul 2016 15:46:17 +0200
From:	Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>
To:	Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>
Cc:	Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>, Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
	Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] iio: sun4i-lradc: Add binding documentation

On Sat, Jul 02, 2016 at 03:32:43PM +0200, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> > > > I believe that the best way to deal with this is to add an
> > > > "allwinner,general-purpose-mode" flag to the existing binding
> > > > (as well as document general purpose mode in the existing
> > > > binding rather then in a new binding doc).
> > > > 
> > > > That seems to be the right thing to do purely looking at this
> > > > from a dt binding pov.
> > > 
> > > There's a way simpler solution: if there's no child nodes, it's meant
> > > to be used as an ADC, otherwise, as input.
> > > 
> > > The logic will have to be a bit more complex than that, since there's
> > > two channels, and you could only require one for the buttons, leaving
> > > the other one available as an ADC.
> > > 
> > > But that doesn't require any new property.
> > 
> > True, if there are no button nodes, then go general-purpose will
> > work too.
> 
> Well, I'd still argue that we need two different compatibles because
> encoding the usage of an IP in its compatible string is less than ideal.

That's true, but it's what we have.

So feel free to add a new compatible if you want, but we'll have to
support the old one anyway.

Maxime

-- 
Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)