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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 15:07:16 +0300 From: Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@...kalelectronics.ru> To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> CC: Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@...il.com>, Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@...ux.intel.com>, Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, Alexey Malahov <Alexey.Malahov@...kalelectronics.ru>, Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>, Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>, Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>, <linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>, linux-i2c <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>, devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 03/12] dt-bindings: i2c: Discard i2c-slave flag from the DW I2C example On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 12:30:04PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 1:00 AM Serge Semin > <Sergey.Semin@...kalelectronics.ru> wrote: > > > > dtc currently doesn't support I2C_OWN_SLAVE_ADDRESS flag set in the > > i2c "reg" property. If it is the compiler will print a warning: > > Shouldn't be dtc whatever tools fixed? See the first patch in the series. > > > Warning (i2c_bus_reg): /example-2/i2c@...0000/eeprom@64: I2C bus unit address format error, expected "40000064" > > Warning (i2c_bus_reg): /example-2/i2c@...0000/eeprom@64:reg: I2C address must be less than 10-bits, got "0x40000064" > > > > In order to silence dtc up let's discard the flag from the DW I2C DT > > binding example for now. Just revert this commit when dtc is fixed. > > Doesn't sound like a good idea. If user happens in between of these > ping-pong change, how they will know this subtle issue? As I see it, there are three ways we can follow. 1) Apply the patch and revert when dtc is fixed. 2) Apply the patch, but add a comment above the property, that we need to get the 0x40000064 address back when dtc is dixed. 3) Leave this ugly warning be until dtc is fixed. In a comment to v2 Rob mentioned a solution like 1). Personally I am ok with either, though I'd like to see a Rob's final comment about this. -Sergey > > -- > With Best Regards, > Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists