linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH V1 05/10] thermal: da9062/61: Thermal junction temperature monitoring 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: <6ED8E3B22081A4459DAC7699F3695FB7018CCE3443@SW-EX-MBX02.diasemi.com>
Date:   Fri, 14 Oct 2016 13:07:59 +0000
From:   Steve Twiss <stwiss.opensource@...semi.com>
To:     Keerthy <a0393675@...com>, Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@...il.com>,
        "Zhang Rui" <rui.zhang@...el.com>
CC:     DEVICETREE <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        LINUX-INPUT <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>,
        LINUX-WATCHDOG <linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org>,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        "Liam Girdwood" <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Support Opensource <Support.Opensource@...semi.com>,
        Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ana.be>,
        LINUX-KERNEL <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        LINUX-PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH V1 05/10] thermal: da9062/61: Thermal junction
 temperature monitoring driver

An update.

On: 07 October 2016 18:49, Steve Twiss wrote:
> On 07 October 2016 06:29, Keerthy [mailto:a0393675@...com] wrote:
> > On Thursday 06 October 2016 02:13 PM, Steve Twiss wrote:
> > > From: Steve Twiss <stwiss.opensource@...semi.com>
[...]
> > > +static const struct da9062_thermal_config da9062_config = {
> > > +	.name = "da9062-thermal",
> > > +};
> > > +
> > > +static const struct da9062_thermal_config da9061_config = {
> > > +	.name = "da9061-thermal",
> > > +};
> > > +
> > > +static const struct of_device_id da9062_compatible_reg_id_table[] = {
> > > +	{ .compatible = "dlg,da9062-thermal", .data = &da9062_config },
> > > +	{ .compatible = "dlg,da9061-thermal", .data = &da9061_config },
> >
> > Two separate compatible values. Do you have anything different apart
> > from the name? Why use 2 compatibles when there is absolutely no
> > difference?
> 
> Yes.
> This was a comment for the watchdog device driver as well. My concern was having
> multiple devices (61 and 62) in the same system -- and allowing the driver to report
> the hardware difference.
> 
> There is discussion going on about this in other threads. Not certain of the
> final outcome yet, apart from my existing proposal should be changed.

An answer to this came from comments by Dmitry Torokhov and Guenter Roeck, who
suggested this: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/10/7/641

I will take a look at this for V2.

Regards,
Steve