linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 0/2] spi: cadence-quadpsi: Add support for the Cadence QSPI controller

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:   Fri, 14 Feb 2020 14:16:45 +0000
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Simon Goldschmidt <simon.k.r.goldschmidt@...il.com>
Cc:     "Ramuthevar,Vadivel MuruganX" 
        <vadivel.muruganx.ramuthevar@...ux.intel.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, Vignesh R <vigneshr@...com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, dan.carpenter@...cle.com,
        cheol.yong.kim@...el.com, qi-ming.wu@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 0/2] spi: cadence-quadpsi: Add support for the Cadence
 QSPI controller

On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 02:49:48PM +0100, Simon Goldschmidt wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 2:15 PM Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:

> > I'm not seeing anything in the driver that removes whatever the current
> > support is?  Unless it's just adding a duplicate driver for the same
> > compatible strings which is obviously a bad idea but at least means that
> > unless people enable the driver there's no risk of it colliding with the
> > existing one.

> It does add a duplicate driver for the same compatible strings. The current
> working driver is in 'drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c'.

> In fact, the compatible string "cdns,qspi-nor" copied from the old driver to
> this new driver is *only* used for altera. TI has its own compatible string,
> the new Intel platform adds its own as well.

Oh, that's not good - it's adding a completely new binding for the same
compatibles which isn't OK.  We can transition to a new driver using the
same binding but we should be keeping the old binding.  If we're moving
the binding document around and/or transitioning to YAML that needs to
be done explicitly rather than adding a new document for the same
compatible.

> As long as that one doesn't get removed, I have nothing against this driver
> here. I'm only concerned that this will get forgotten. And given that I added
> altera guys to the loop in one of the previous versions, I just was surprised
> they aren't on CC in this version.

Yes, like I say it'd be much better to get their review.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)