linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v10 1/6] dt-bindings: mfd: add document bindings for mp2629

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:   Mon, 20 Apr 2020 08:19:10 +0100
From:   Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
To:     Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
Cc:     saravanan sekar <sravanhome@...il.com>, andy.shevchenko@...il.com,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, knaack.h@....de, lars@...afoo.de,
        pmeerw@...erw.net, sre@...nel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 1/6] dt-bindings: mfd: add document bindings for
 mp2629

On Sat, 18 Apr 2020, Jonathan Cameron wrote:

> On Sat, 18 Apr 2020 17:01:17 +0200
> saravanan sekar <sravanhome@...il.com> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Jonathan,
> > 
> > On 18/04/20 4:53 pm, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > > On Fri, 17 Apr 2020 10:49:58 +0200
> > > Saravanan Sekar <sravanhome@...il.com> wrote:
> > >  
> > >> Add device tree binding information for mp2629 mfd driver.
> > >>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Saravanan Sekar <sravanhome@...il.com>
> > >> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
> > >> ---
> > >>   .../devicetree/bindings/mfd/mps,mp2629.yaml   | 61 +++++++++++++++++++
> > >>   1 file changed, 61 insertions(+)
> > >>   create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/mps,mp2629.yaml
> > >>
> > >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/mps,mp2629.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/mps,mp2629.yaml
> > >> new file mode 100644
> > >> index 000000000000..b25b29259d67
> > >> --- /dev/null
> > >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/mps,mp2629.yaml
> > >> @@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
> > >> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause
> > >> +%YAML 1.2
> > >> +---
> > >> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/mfd/mps,mp2629.yaml#
> > >> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> > >> +
> > >> +title: MP2629 Battery Charger PMIC from Monolithic Power System.
> > >> +
> > >> +maintainers:
> > >> +  - Saravanan Sekar <sravanhome@...il.com>
> > >> +
> > >> +description: |
> > >> +  MP2629 is a PMIC providing battery charging and power supply for smartphones,
> > >> +  wireless camera and portable devices. Chip is controlled over I2C.
> > >> +
> > >> +  The battery charge management device handles battery charger controller and
> > >> +  ADC IIO device for battery, system voltage
> > >> +
> > >> +properties:
> > >> +  compatible:
> > >> +    const: mps,mp2629
> > >> +
> > >> +  reg:
> > >> +    maxItems: 1
> > >> +
> > >> +  interrupts:
> > >> +    maxItems: 1
> > >> +
> > >> +  interrupt-controller: true
> > >> +
> > >> +  "#interrupt-cells":
> > >> +    const: 2
> > >> +    description:
> > >> +      The first cell is the IRQ number, the second cell is the trigger type.
> > >> +
> > >> +required:
> > >> +  - compatible
> > >> +  - reg
> > >> +  - interrupts
> > >> +  - interrupt-controller
> > >> +  - "#interrupt-cells"
> > >> +
> > >> +examples:
> > >> +  - |
> > >> +    #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/irq.h>
> > >> +    #include <dt-bindings/input/linux-event-codes.h>
> > >> +    i2c@...05000 {  
> > > I thought the general trend for i2c devices was to leave the i2c
> > > part 'vague'.
> > >
> > >      i2c {
> > >            #address-cells = <1>;
> > >            #size-cells = <0>;
> > >           
> > >            pmic@.... etc  
> > I agree with you and initial patch was as like above, but Lee was 
> > somehow unhappy and not satisfied with
> > 
> > my explanations. Please find more info on v4.
> 
> Ah. Curious.  Oh well - over to Rob for a definitive answer!

I haven't seen this spoken about before.  The comments were based
solely on my own views of, the example should provide a solid, valid,
potentially working block for people to use as a reference.

Would an I2C node missing an address be a valid DTS/DTSI entry?

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Linaro Services Technical Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog