linux-kernel - RE: [RFC] regulator: da9052/53: da9052-i2c.txt binding document changes

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 28 Jul 2016 08:26:14 +0000
From:	Steve Twiss <stwiss.opensource@...semi.com>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC:	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	DEVICTREE <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	LINUXKERNEL <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Ying-Chun Liu (PaulLiu" <paul.liu@...aro.org>,
	Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
	Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...aro.org>,
	Support Opensource <Support.Opensource@...semi.com>
Subject: RE: [RFC] regulator: da9052/53: da9052-i2c.txt binding document
 changes

On 27 July 2016 19:24, Mark Brown wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 11:31:27AM +0000, Steve Twiss wrote:
> 
> > There are already several device tree files using a naming scheme different to that found
> > in the binding text document. Since those have been used for real already, I will just follow
> > those existing DT file naming conventions instead.
> 
> The other thing you can try to do here is have a -v2 binding with the
> corrected names that's easier for people to follow though it does make
> the implementation more complex and may not be worth it.

Yes, I think it would be overly complicated to have a -v2 compatible option in this case.