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, 10 Nov 2016 10:26:50 +0000
From:   Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To:     Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc:     Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
        Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@...libre.com>,
        Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-amlogic@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 6/8] Documentation: bindings: add compatible specific
 to legacy SCPI protocol



On 10/11/16 01:22, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 02, 2016 at 10:52:09PM -0600, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>> This patch adds specific compatible to support legacy SCPI protocol.
>>
>> Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
>> ---
>>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scpi.txt | 4 +++-
>>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scpi.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scpi.txt
>> index d1882c4540d0..ebd03fc93135 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scpi.txt
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scpi.txt
>> @@ -7,7 +7,9 @@ by Linux to initiate various system control and power operations.
>>
>>  Required properties:
>>
>> -- compatible : should be "arm,scpi"
>> +- compatible : should be
>> +	* "arm,scpi" : For implementations complying to SCPI v1.0 or above
>> +	* "arm,legacy-scpi" : For implementations complying pre SCPI v1.0
>
> I'd prefer that we explicitly enumerate the old versions. Are there
> many?
>

I understand your concern, but this legacy SCPI protocol was not
officially released. It was just WIP which vendors picked up from very
early releases. Since they are not numbered, it's hard to have specific
compatibles with different versions until v1.0. That's one of the reason
to retain platform specific compatible so that we can add any quirks
based on them if needed.

I will probably add these information in the commit log so that it's
clear why we can't do version based compatible.

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ