linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 03/11] arm64: dts: renesas: hihope-common: Separate out Rev.2.0 specific into hihope-common-rev2.dtsi file

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CA+V-a8tUvT1Q+nhsk1Te5CrYSSTbEqvO1=8QyRHY4q2VYNzoKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 23 Jun 2020 09:34:44 +0100
From:   "Lad, Prabhakar" <prabhakar.csengg@...il.com>
To:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc:     Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@...renesas.com>,
        Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/11] arm64: dts: renesas: hihope-common: Separate out
 Rev.2.0 specific into hihope-common-rev2.dtsi file

Hi Geert,

On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 9:14 AM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Prabhakar,
>
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 9:51 AM Lad, Prabhakar
> <prabhakar.csengg@...il.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 3:59 PM Lad, Prabhakar
> > <prabhakar.csengg@...il.com> wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 3:47 PM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 8:41 PM Lad Prabhakar
> > > > <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@...renesas.com> wrote:
> > > > > Separate out Rev.2.0 specific hardware changes into
> > > > > hihope-common-rev2.dtsi file so that hihope-common.dtsi can be used
> > > > > by all the variants for RZ/G2M[N] boards.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@...renesas.com>
> > > > > Reviewed-by: Marian-Cristian Rotariu <marian-cristian.rotariu.rb@...renesas.com>
>
> > > > > @@ -0,0 +1,101 @@
> > > > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> > > > > +/*
> > > > > + * Device Tree Source for the HiHope RZ/G2[MN] main board Rev.2.0 common
> > > > > + * parts
> > > > > + *
> > > > > + * Copyright (C) 2020 Renesas Electronics Corp.
> > > > > + */
> > > > > +
> > > > > +#include <dt-bindings/gpio/gpio.h>
> > > > > +
> > > > > +/ {
> > > > > +       leds {
> > > > > +               compatible = "gpio-leds";
> > > > > +
> > > > > +               bt_active_led {
> > > > > +                       label = "blue:bt";
> > > > > +                       gpios = <&gpio7  0 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
> > > > > +                       linux,default-trigger = "hci0-power";
> > > > > +                       default-state = "off";
> > > > > +               };
> > > > > +
> > > > > +               led0 {
> > > > > +                       gpios = <&gpio6 11 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
> > > > > +               };
> > > > > +
> > > > > +               led1 {
> > > > > +                       gpios = <&gpio6 12 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
> > > > > +               };
> > > > > +
> > > > > +               led2 {
> > > > > +                       gpios = <&gpio6 13 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
> > > > > +               };
> > > > > +
> > > > > +               led3 {
> > > > > +                       gpios = <&gpio0  0 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
> > > > > +               };
> > > >
> > > > led1, led2, and led3 are present on both, so I'd keep them in
> > > > hihope-common.dtsi.
> > > >
> > > The leds defined in hihope-common-rev4.dtsi are as per the label names
> > > on the schematics/board so that it's easier to identify the LED's by
> > > name.
> > >
> > I was waiting on the above to be confirmed.
>
> I can confirm the naming of the LEDs on the rev4 board.
> However, following the same reasoning, the rev2 LEDs should be renamed
> led2201, led2202, led2203, and led2402 ;-)

I didn't want to change any behaviour if some was using the LED's with names.

> Does anyone rely on the names?  If not, it may make sense to use the
> rev4 names for both, in the common file?
>
Not sure, but I'll take your suggestion and just name them as per rev4 naming.

> Not even considering the switches...
> Seems they forgot to rename switches SW220[123] when renaming LED220[123].
> Worse, on rev2, you have SW220_2_/LED220_1_ sharing a GPIO, and
> SW220_1_/LED220_2_ sharing another one.
>
> And on rev4, GP6_11/GP_LED/TSW_0_ is driving LED_4_ and SW220_2_?
>
> Conclusion: I don't care how you name them ;-)
>
 :)

Cheers,
--Prabhakar

> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>
>                         Geert
>
> --
> Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org
>
> In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
> when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
>                                 -- Linus Torvalds