linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] dt-bindings: pinctrl: intel: Add for new SoC

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]

Date:   Thu, 14 Nov 2019 11:39:40 -0600
From:   Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
To:     "Tanwar, Rahul" <rahul.tanwar@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andriy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>,
        qi-ming.wu@...el.com, yixin zhu <yixin.zhu@...ux.intel.com>,
        cheol.yong.kim@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] dt-bindings: pinctrl: intel: Add for new SoC

On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 9:27 PM Tanwar, Rahul
<rahul.tanwar@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Linus,
>
> On 13/11/2019 10:46 PM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 11:11 AM Rahul Tanwar
> > <rahul.tanwar@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Add dt bindings document for pinmux & GPIO controller driver of
> >> Intel Lightning Mountain SoC.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Rahul Tanwar <rahul.tanwar@...ux.intel.com>
> > (...)
> >
> >> +properties:
> >> +  compatible:
> >> +    const: intel,lgm-pinctrl
> > Just noted from another review where Rob noted that this name should
> > match the internal name in the datasheet for this hardware block. Is it
> > really called "lgm-pinctrl" inside Intel?
> >
> > intel,lightning-mountain-io and similar are perfectly fine if that is the
> > name it has in your documentation.
>
> Our documentation does not have any specific names for these hardware
> blocks. It names it in a very generic/standard manner like GPIO, pinmux..
>
> To make the name explicit & self explanatory, i should probably change
> the name as you suggested i.e. intel,lightning-mountain-io.

You should also be consistent with 'lgm' vs. 'lightning-mountain' use
across bindings some of which I think have already been accepted.

Rob