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  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:   Sat, 21 Nov 2020 07:30:05 +0800
From:   Icenowy Zheng <icenowy@...c.io>
To:     Maxime Ripard <maxime@...no.tech>
CC:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
        Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@...l.net>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-sunxi@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH 3/3] arm64: allwinner: dts: a64: add DT for PineTab developer sample



于 2020年11月20日 GMT+08:00 下午11:59:39, Maxime Ripard <maxime@...no.tech> 写到:
>On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 02:36:48AM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 于 2020年11月16日 GMT+08:00 下午11:55:08, Maxime Ripard <maxime@...no.tech>
>写到:
>> >On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 06:41:37PM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> 
>> >> 于 2020年11月10日 GMT+08:00 下午6:39:25, Maxime Ripard
><maxime@...no.tech>
>> >写到:
>> >> >On Sat, Nov 07, 2020 at 08:53:32PM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote:
>> >> >> Some developers received PineTab samples that used an old LCD
>> >panel.
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> Add device tree for these samples.
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> Signed-off-by: Icenowy Zheng <icenowy@...c.io>
>> >> >> ---
>> >> >>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/Makefile        |  1 +
>> >> >>  .../dts/allwinner/sun50i-a64-pinetab-dev.dts  | 28
>> >> >+++++++++++++++++++
>> >> >>  2 files changed, 29 insertions(+)
>> >> >>  create mode 100644
>> >> >arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-a64-pinetab-dev.dts
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/Makefile
>> >> >b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/Makefile
>> >> >> index 211d1e9d4701..a221dcebfad4 100644
>> >> >> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/Makefile
>> >> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/Makefile
>> >> >> @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@ dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SUNXI) +=
>> >> >sun50i-a64-pinephone-1.0.dtb
>> >> >>  dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SUNXI) += sun50i-a64-pinephone-1.1.dtb
>> >> >>  dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SUNXI) += sun50i-a64-pinephone-1.2.dtb
>> >> >>  dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SUNXI) += sun50i-a64-pinetab.dtb
>> >> >> +dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SUNXI) += sun50i-a64-pinetab-dev.dtb
>> >> >>  dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SUNXI) += sun50i-a64-sopine-baseboard.dtb
>> >> >>  dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SUNXI) += sun50i-a64-teres-i.dtb
>> >> >>  dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_SUNXI) += sun50i-a100-allwinner-perf1.dtb
>> >> >> diff --git
>> >a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-a64-pinetab-dev.dts
>> >> >b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-a64-pinetab-dev.dts
>> >> >> new file mode 100644
>> >> >> index 000000000000..3a4153890f3e
>> >> >> --- /dev/null
>> >> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/allwinner/sun50i-a64-pinetab-dev.dts
>> >> >> @@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
>> >> >> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0+ OR MIT)
>> >> >> +/*
>> >> >> + * Copyright (C) 2020 Icenowy Zheng <icenowy@...c.io>
>> >> >> + *
>> >> >> + */
>> >> >> +
>> >> >> +/dts-v1/;
>> >> >> +
>> >> >> +#include "sun50i-a64-pinetab.dts"
>> >> >> +
>> >> >> +/ {
>> >> >> +	model = "PineTab Developer Sample";
>> >> >> +	compatible = "pine64,pinetab-dev", "allwinner,sun50i-a64";
>> >> >> +};
>> >> >
>> >> >Changing the DT and the compatible half-way through it isn't ok.
>> >Please
>> >> >add a new DT with the newer revision like we did for the
>pinephone
>> >> 
>> >> We did this on Pine H64.
>> >
>> >What are you referring to? I couldn't find a commit where we did
>what
>> >you suggested in that patch to the pine H64.
>> 
>> Oh the situation is complex. On Pine H64, we didn't specify anything
>at
>> start (which is the same here), the DT is originally version-neutral
>> but then transitioned to model B, then reverted to model A. Here the
>DT is always
>> for the sample.
>> 
>> However, for Pine H64 there's model A/B names, but for PineTab
>there's no
>> any samples that are sold, thus except who got the samples, all
>PineTab
>> owners simply owns a "PineTab", not a "PineTab xxx version".
>
>It's fairly simple really, we can't really predict the future, so any
>DT
>submitted is for the current version of whatever board there is. This
>is
>what we (somewhat messily) did for the PineH64, for the pinephone, or
>really any other board that has several revisions

Okay. But I'm not satisfied with a non-public sample occupies
the pinetab name. Is rename it to pinetab-dev and add a
pinetab-retail okay?

>
>Maxime

Powered by blists - more mailing lists