linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v10 3/3] dt-bindings: mfd: Document Renesas R-Car Gen3 RPC-IF controller bindings

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <9bc4847f-8e7e-3627-5394-6f2b5c5972bc@cogentembedded.com>
Date:   Thu, 18 Apr 2019 19:55:59 +0300
From:   Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
To:     masonccyang@...c.com.tw
Cc:     bbrezillon@...nel.org, broonie@...nel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
        Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>, juliensu@...c.com.tw,
        lee.jones@...aro.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org,
        marek.vasut@...il.com, mark.rutland@....com, robh+dt@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 3/3] dt-bindings: mfd: Document Renesas R-Car Gen3
 RPC-IF controller bindings

Hello!

On 04/18/2019 08:55 AM, masonccyang@...c.com.tw wrote:

>> >  > > Document the bindings used by the Renesas R-Car Gen3 RPC-IF
>> MFD controller.
>> >  > >
>> >  > > Signed-off-by: Mason Yang <masonccyang@...c.com.tw>
>> >  > > ---
>> >  > >  .../devicetree/bindings/mfd/mfd-renesas-rpc.txt  | 37 +++++++++
>> >  > +++++++++++++
>> >  > >  1 file changed, 37 insertions(+)
>> >  > >  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/mfd-
>> >  > renesas-rpc.txt
>> >  > >
>> >  > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/mfd-renesas-
>> >  > rpc.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/mfd-renesas-rpc.txt
>> >  > > new file mode 100644
>> >  > > index 0000000..bfb3d29
>> >  > > --- /dev/null
>> >  > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/mfd-renesas-rpc.txt
>> >  > > @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
>> >  > > +Renesas R-Car Gen3 RPC-IF MFD controller Device Tree Bindings
>> >  > > +-------------------------------------------------------------
>> >  > > +
>> >  > > +Required properties:
>> >  > > +- compatible: should be an SoC-specific compatible value, followed by
>> >  > > +      "renesas,rcar-gen3-rpc" as a fallback.
>> >  > > +      supported SoC-specific values are:
>> >  > > +      "renesas,r8a77995-rpc" (R-Car D3)
>> >  > > +- reg: should contain 2 entries, one for the base address of rpc-
>> >  > if registers,
>> >  > > +   and one for the direct mapping area
>> >  > > +- reg-names: should contain "regs", and "dirmap"
>> >  >
>> >  >    The device tree describes the hardware, not the driver. Why
>> did you remove
>> >  > the "wbuf" area?
>> >
>> > I don't think we should describe the hardware that driver did not
>> implement it
>> > because there are still many RPC registers we don't use them.
>>
>>     I have to repeat: we describe the hardware, not the driver capabilities.
> 
> how about:
> 
> - reg: should contain three register areas:
>           first for the base address of rpc-if registers,
>           second for the direct mapping read mode and
>           third for an optional write buffer area.
>  - reg-names: should contain "regs", "dirmap" and "wbuf"(optional).
> 
> is it OK ?

   No, the write buffer area is always there, at least on the gen3 chips.
(I forgot which other Renesas SoC has RPC-IF as well).

> thanks & best regards,
> Mason

MBR, Sergei