linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 01/21] dt-bindings: i2c: eeprom: Document manufacturer used as generic fallback

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]

Message-ID: <CABxcv=mq7xOKL5WXG+qkhwQCiOuN4J=WWRzKnq0DTx9vxinOpQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 15 May 2017 12:48:03 +0200
From:   Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@...hile0.org>
To:     Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc:     Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
        Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@...com>,
        David Lechner <david@...hnology.com>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/21] dt-bindings: i2c: eeprom: Document manufacturer
 used as generic fallback

Hello Rob,

Thanks for the feedback and sorry for the delayed response (I've been
moving to a new country so didn't have too much time to answer
emails).

On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 1:35 AM, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 6:27 PM, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 10:04:25PM -0300, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:

[snip]

>>>
>>>        If there is no specific driver for <manufacturer>, a generic
>>> -      driver based on <type> is selected. Possible types are:
>>> +      driver based on <type> and manufacturer "atmel" is selected.
>>> +      Possible types are:
>>
>> This isn't quite right. What the driver does isn't really relevant to
>> the binding.
>>
>> These types with no vendor are used as the compatible string, so we have
>> to allow them. But it should be clear that no vendor is deprecated.
>> Ironically, it is a lot of Atmel boards that do this.
>>
>> We should also explicitly list what are valid manufacturers. We also
>> have "at" as a vendor prefix which perhaps we should explicitly say is
>> deprecated.
>
> I should perhaps look at the rest of the series before replying..
>
> Based on that, the only comment that applies is listing the
> manufacturers that are valid. From a DT perspective, I should not have
> to know what the OS driver supports. If the device is compatible with
> atmel, then that is required. If not, then the specific manufacturer's
> compatible alone is enough and the OS has to match to that.
>

Got it, I'll re-spin the series probably this week adding that
information to the DT binding doc.

> Rob

Best regards,
Javier