linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: display/panel: Add Innolux EJ030NA

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sat, 10 Jul 2021 11:21:56 +0100
From:   Paul Cercueil <paul@...pouillou.net>
To:     Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
Cc:     Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, list@...ndingux.net,
        Christophe Branchereau <cbranchereau@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: display/panel: Add Innolux EJ030NA


[...]

>>  I am not sure; the doc states that this (additionalProperties: 
>> false) "can't
>>  be used in case where another schema is referenced", which is the 
>> case here,
>>  as we include "panel-common.yaml".
> 
> This DT schema already list all relevant properties like:
> 
> 	backlight: true
> 
> So "additionalProperties: false" tells that no other properties are
> allowed other than the listed properties.
> 
> To my best understanding unevaluatedProperties: false is less strict 
> and
> should be used if one does not list all possilbe properties.
> This could be the case for a panel haging below a SPI controller as in
> this case. So in other words giving this some extra thought I think
> unevaluatedProperties: false is OK here.

A panel below a SPI controller would have all its SPI-specific 
properties covered by spi-controller.yaml, I believe? So maybe 
"additionalProperties: false" would work?

In any case, if I use "additionalProperties: false", "make 
dt_binding_check" complains that my example's "spi-max-frequency" 
property is not covered. So maybe you are right.

> So my r-b is ok if you keep it as it.
> 
> PS. Where do you guys hang out with the downfall of freenode - 
> somewhere
> on oftc?

We moved to #opendingux on Libera.

Cheers,
-Paul