linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 02/11] dt-bindings: i2c: Discard i2c-slave flag from the DW I2C example

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, 29 May 2020 12:13:38 -0600
From:   Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To:     Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@...kalelectronics.ru>
Cc:     Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@...il.com>,
        Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
        Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
        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@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 02/11] dt-bindings: i2c: Discard i2c-slave flag from
 the DW I2C example

On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 06:33:51PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> Rob,
> Could you pay attention to this patch? The patchset review procedure is
> nearly over, while the DT part is only partly reviewed by you.

Pretty sure I commented on this. Not sure what version, you're sending 
new versions too fast. Give people time to review.

> 
> Thanks
> -Sergey
> 
> On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 06:30:37PM +0300, Serge Semin 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:
> > 
> > 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.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@...kalelectronics.ru>
> > Cc: Alexey Malahov <Alexey.Malahov@...kalelectronics.ru>
> > Cc: Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>
> > Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
> > Cc: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
> > Cc: linux-mips@...r.kernel.org
> > 
> > ---
> > 
> > Changelog v3:
> > - This is a new patch created as a result of the Rob request to remove
> >   the EEPROM-slave bit setting in the DT binndings example until the dtc
> >   is fixed.
> > ---
> >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/snps,designware-i2c.yaml | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/snps,designware-i2c.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/snps,designware-i2c.yaml
> > index 4bd430b2b41d..101d78e8f19d 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/snps,designware-i2c.yaml
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/snps,designware-i2c.yaml
> > @@ -137,7 +137,7 @@ examples:
> >  
> >        eeprom@64 {
> >          compatible = "linux,slave-24c02";
> > -        reg = <0x40000064>;
> > +        reg = <0x64>;

This is wrong though because "linux,slave-24c02" should have bit 30 set. 
(And either the unit-address was wrong or we can define the unit-address 
does not include the high bits.)

Rob