linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] drivers: edac: Add EDAC driver support for QCOM SoCs

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: <a8fff11e-5821-f191-ed2e-ec99fadcb5e6@codeaurora.org>
Date:   Tue, 11 Sep 2018 15:11:30 +0530
From:   Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@...eaurora.org>
To:     vnkgutta@...eaurora.org
Cc:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, evgreen@...omium.org,
        robh@...nel.org, mchehab@...nel.org, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andy Gross <andy.gross@...aro.org>,
        David Brown <david.brown@...aro.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-soc@...r.kernel.org,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, tsoni@...eaurora.org,
        ckadabi@...eaurora.org, rishabhb@...eaurora.org,
        swboyd@...omium.org, bjorn.andersson@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] drivers: edac: Add EDAC driver support for QCOM
 SoCs

On 9/11/2018 4:15 AM, vnkgutta@...eaurora.org wrote:
> On 2018-09-06 22:02, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
>> On 9/7/2018 4:01 AM, vnkgutta@...eaurora.org wrote:
>>> On 2018-09-06 05:38, Sai Prakash Ranjan wrote:
>>>> On 9/5/2018 4:52 AM, Venkata Narendra Kumar Gutta wrote:
>>>>> +static const struct of_device_id qcom_llcc_edac_match_table[] = {
>>>>> +    { .compatible = "qcom,llcc-edac" },
>>>>> +    { },
>>>>> +};
>>>>> +
>>>>>
>>>> Hi Venkata,
>>>>
>>>> Devicetree binding for llcc is updated, but what about this compatible?
>>>
>>> Does it need documentation too? I was not sure if I should add 
>>> documentation for this or not!
>>>
>>
>> It does not require a separate binding, what I meant was to add this
>> compatible in the llcc binding itself, maybe as a subnode if it is
>> correct.
> 
> Hi,
> 
> We aren't really using this of_device_id structure, as this driver is 
> being registered from LLCC through
> platform_register_device_data(...). This structure initialization is 
> just dead code as this driver won't be probed based on the DT entries.
> 
> Hence removing this compatible property and the corresponding struct in 
> the next patchset.
> 
> So, this doesn't need an extra binding/documentation.

Ok. Now that you have removed the compatible, it should be fine.

Thanks