linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] dt-bindings: ata: Add device tree binding fir Mikrotik RB532 PATA controller

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]

Message-ID: <20210503192805.GA2232229@robh.at.kernel.org>
Date:   Mon, 3 May 2021 14:28:05 -0500
From:   Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To:     Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>
Cc:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] dt-bindings: ata: Add device tree binding fir
 Mikrotik RB532 PATA controller

On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 06:33:36PM +0200, Thomas Bogendoerfer wrote:
> Add YAML devicetree binding for Mikrotik RB532 PATA controller.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>
> ---
>  .../bindings/ata/mikrotek,rb532-pata.yaml     | 43 +++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 43 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ata/mikrotek,rb532-pata.yaml
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ata/mikrotek,rb532-pata.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ata/mikrotek,rb532-pata.yaml
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..f74880c4fd82
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ata/mikrotek,rb532-pata.yaml
> @@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause)
> +%YAML 1.2
> +---
> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/ata/mikrotek,rb532-pata.yaml#
> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
> +
> +title: Mikrotek RB532 PATA Controller bindings

We have a common binding for this (ata/pata-common.yaml). Really, all 
you'd gain is how to support 2 devices is defined. Should you use that? 
Is CompactFlash only a single device, I don't remember. If so, is that a 
limitation for the board or could 2 devices be supported?

> +
> +maintainers:
> +  - Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>
> +
> +properties:
> +  compatible:
> +    const: mikrotik,rb532-pata
> +
> +  reg:
> +    maxItems: 1
> +
> +  interrupts:
> +    maxItems: 1
> +
> +  gpio:

'<name>-gpios' is the preferred form (even for singular).

> +    maxItems: 1
> +
> +required:
> +  - compatible
> +  - reg
> +  - interrupts
> +  - gpio
> +
> +additionalProperties: false
> +
> +examples:
> +  - |
> +    cf@...10000 {
> +        compatible = "mikrotik,rb532-pata";
> +        reg = <0x18a10000 0xc04>;
> +
> +        gpio = <&gpio0 13 0>;
> +
> +        interrupt-parent = <&gpio0>;
> +        interrupts = <13 0>;
> +    };
> -- 
> 2.29.2
>