linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] staging: Introduce NVIDIA Tegra20 video decoder 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: <ca4fa045-17f0-9142-6bca-bbf472c1f3bb@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 18 Oct 2017 00:26:45 +0300
From:   Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
To:     Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
Cc:     Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
        Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
        "linux-media@...r.kernel.org" <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
        devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] staging: Introduce NVIDIA Tegra20 video decoder
 driver

On 18.10.2017 00:13, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 3:24 PM, Thierry Reding
> <thierry.reding@...il.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 03:13:54PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
>> [...]
>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/tegra/nvidia,tegra20-vde.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/tegra/nvidia,tegra20-vde.txt
>> [...]
>>>> +- resets : Must contain an entry for each entry in reset-names.
>>>> +  See ../reset/reset.txt for details.
>>>> +- reset-names : Must include the following entries:
>>>> +  - vde
>>>
>>> -names is pointless when there is only one.
>>
>> I'd prefer to keep it. In the past we occasionally had to add clocks or
>> resets to a device tree node where only one had been present (and hence
>> no -names property) and that caused some awkwardness because verbiage
>> had to be added to the bindings that clarified that one particular entry
>> (the original one) always had to come first.
> 
> The order should be specified regardless of -names and the original
> one has to come first if you add any. That's not awkwardness, but how
> bindings work.

Probably it would be okay to remove '-names' from the binding doc, but keep them
in the actual DT, wouldn't it?