linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v2 1/3] dt-bindings: nvmem: Add devicetree bindings for qfprom-efuse

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, 15 Jun 2020 15:28:45 +0100
From:   Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>
To:     Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Cc:     Ravi Kumar Bokka <rbokka@...eaurora.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@...eaurora.org>,
        Sai Prakash Ranjan <saiprakash.ranjan@...eaurora.org>,
        dhavalp@...eaurora.org, mturney@...eaurora.org,
        sparate@...eaurora.org, c_rbokka@...eaurora.org,
        mkurumel@...eaurora.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 1/3] dt-bindings: nvmem: Add devicetree bindings for
 qfprom-efuse



On 15/06/2020 15:27, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 3:44 AM Srinivas Kandagatla
> <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org> wrote:
>>
>>>> +properties:
>>>> +  compatible:
>>>> +    enum:
>>>> +      - qcom,qfprom
>>>
>>> As per discussion in patch #1, I believe SoC compatible should be here
>>> too in case it is ever needed.  This is standard practice for dts
>>> files for IP blocks embedded in an SoC.  AKA, this should be:
>>>
>>>       items:
>>>         - enum:
>>>             - qcom,apq8064-qfprom
>>>             - qcom,apq8084-qfprom
>>>             - qcom,msm8974-qfprom
>>>             - qcom,msm8916-qfprom
>>>             - qcom,msm8996-qfprom
>>>             - qcom,msm8998-qfprom
>>>             - qcom,qcs404-qfprom
>>>             - qcom,sc7180-qfprom
>>>             - qcom,sdm845-qfprom
>>
>>
>> Above is not required for now in this patchset, as we can attach data at
>> runtime specific to version of the qfprom.
>>
>> This can be added when required!
> 
> I'm OK with leaving off for this patchset.  After we get everything
> landed for blowing fuses then I can send out a separate patch where we
> can debate the merits of adding the SoC-specific compatible strings.
> :-)  Sound good?

Sounds good!

--srini

> 
> -Doug
>