linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: hwmon: Correct vendor for mcp980x

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:   Wed, 15 Jul 2020 15:41:44 -0600
From:   Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To:     Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc:     "Daniel M. Weeks" <dan@...weeks.net>, jdelvare@...e.com,
        linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: hwmon: Correct vendor for mcp980x

On Fri, Jul 03, 2020 at 02:59:12PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 7/3/20 8:37 AM, Daniel M. Weeks wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel M. Weeks <dan@...weeks.net>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwmon/lm75.txt | 2 +-
> >  drivers/hwmon/lm75.c                             | 8 ++++----
> >  2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwmon/lm75.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwmon/lm75.txt
> > index 273616702c51..e5bb554cd2c3 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwmon/lm75.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/hwmon/lm75.txt
> > @@ -14,10 +14,10 @@ Required properties:
> >  		"maxim,max6626",
> >  		"maxim,max31725",
> >  		"maxim,max31726",
> > -		"maxim,mcp980x",
> >  		"nxp,pct2075",
> >  		"st,stds75",
> >  		"st,stlm75",
> > +		"microchip,mcp980x",
> >  		"microchip,tcn75",
> >  		"ti,tmp100",
> >  		"ti,tmp101",
> > diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/lm75.c b/drivers/hwmon/lm75.c
> > index ba0be48aeadd..a8cfc7e4a685 100644
> > --- a/drivers/hwmon/lm75.c
> > +++ b/drivers/hwmon/lm75.c
> > @@ -690,10 +690,6 @@ static const struct of_device_id __maybe_unused lm75_of_match[] = {
> >  		.compatible = "maxim,max31726",
> >  		.data = (void *)max31725
> >  	},
> > -	{
> > -		.compatible = "maxim,mcp980x",
> > -		.data = (void *)mcp980x
> > -	},
> >  	{
> >  		.compatible = "nxp,pct2075",
> >  		.data = (void *)pct2075
> > @@ -706,6 +702,10 @@ static const struct of_device_id __maybe_unused lm75_of_match[] = {
> >  		.compatible = "st,stlm75",
> >  		.data = (void *)stlm75
> >  	},
> > +	{
> > +		.compatible = "microchip,mcp980x",
> > +		.data = (void *)mcp980x
> 
> Hmm, makes me wonder if we should replace this with correct chip names
> since we are at it. After all, it only includes mcp980{0,1,2,3} and not mcp9805.
> 
> Rob, any thoughts ?

Do we need to distinguish the chips? Aren't there existing users?

Rob