linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: ufs: Fix the compatible string definition

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: <20181018004214.GA5937@bogus>
Date:   Wed, 17 Oct 2018 19:42:14 -0500
From:   Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To:     Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Cc:     "Martin K . Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        Can Guo <cang@...eaurora.org>, evgreen@...omium.org,
        Vivek Gautam <vivek.gautam@...eaurora.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, sayalil@...eaurora.org,
        asutoshd@...eaurora.org, Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, liwei <liwei213@...wei.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mathieu Malaterre <malat@...ian.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: ufs: Fix the compatible string definition

On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 14:39:26 -0700, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> If you look at the bindings for the UFS Host Controller it says:
> 
> - compatible: must contain "jedec,ufs-1.1" or "jedec,ufs-2.0", may
>               also list one or more of the following:
>                  "qcom,msm8994-ufshc"
>                  "qcom,msm8996-ufshc"
>                  "qcom,ufshc"
> 
> My reading of that is that it's fine to just have either of these:
> 1. "qcom,msm8996-ufshc", "jedec,ufs-2.0"
> 2. "qcom,ufshc", "jedec,ufs-2.0"
> 
> As far as I can tell neither of the above is actually a good idea.
> 
> For #1 it turns out that the driver currently only keys off the
> compatible string "qcom,ufshc" so it won't actually probe.
> 
> For #2 the driver won't probe but it's not a good idea to keep the SoC
> name out of the compatible string.
> 
> Let's update the compatible string to make it really explicit.  We'll
> include a nod to the existing driver and the old binding and say that
> we should always include the "qcom,ufshc" string in addition to the
> SoC compatible string.
> 
> While we're at it we'll also include another example SoC known to have
> UFS: sdm845.
> 
> Fixes: 47555a5c8a11 ("scsi: ufs: make the UFS variant a platform device")
> Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
> ---
> 
>  .../devicetree/bindings/ufs/ufshcd-pltfrm.txt       | 13 ++++++++-----
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 

Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>