linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 2/5] dt_bindings: ROHM BD99954 Charger

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:   Tue, 18 Feb 2020 14:21:22 -0600
From:   Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To:     Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@...rohmeurope.com>
Cc:     matti.vaittinen@...rohmeurope.com, mazziesaccount@...il.com,
        mikko.mutanen@...rohmeurope.com, markus.laine@...rohmeurope.com,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 2/5] dt_bindings: ROHM BD99954 Charger

On Fri, 14 Feb 2020 09:36:47 +0200, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> The ROHM BD99954 is a Battery Management LSI for 1-4 cell Lithium-Ion
> secondary battery. Intended to be used in space-constraint equipment such
> as Low profile Notebook PC, Tablets and other applications. BD99954
> provides a Dual-source Battery Charger, two port BC1.2 detection and a
> Battery Monitor.
> 
> Document the DT bindings for BD99954
> 
> Signed-off-by: Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@...rohmeurope.com>
> ---
> 
> It would probably be nice if the charger DT binding yaml could somehow
> be listing and evaluating properties that it can use from static battery
> nodes - and perhaps some warning could be emitted if unsupported
> properties are given from battery nodes(?) Just some thinking here.
> What if the charger ignores for example the current limits from battery
> node (I am not sure but I think a few may ignore) - I guess it would be
> nice to give a nudge to a person who added those properties in his DT
> if they won't have any impact? Any thoughts?
> 
>  .../bindings/power/supply/rohm,bd9995x.yaml   | 167 ++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 167 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/supply/rohm,bd9995x.yaml
> 

My bot found errors running 'make dt_binding_check' on your patch:

warning: no schema found in file: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/supply/rohm,bd9995x.yaml
/builds/robherring/linux-dt-review/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/supply/rohm,bd9995x.yaml: ignoring, error parsing file
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/simple-framebuffer.example.dts:21.16-37.11: Warning (chosen_node_is_root): /example-0/chosen: chosen node must be at root node
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/supply/rohm,bd9995x.yaml:  while scanning a simple key
  in "<unicode string>", line 29, column 3
could not find expected ':'
  in "<unicode string>", line 30, column 1
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/Makefile:12: recipe for target 'Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/supply/rohm,bd9995x.example.dts' failed
make[1]: *** [Documentation/devicetree/bindings/power/supply/rohm,bd9995x.example.dts] Error 1
Makefile:1263: recipe for target 'dt_binding_check' failed
make: *** [dt_binding_check] Error 2

See https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1237902
Please check and re-submit.