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: <9fab978d-d24f-575b-959b-acfe05c5c4f3@linaro.org>
Date:   Sat, 2 Apr 2022 18:53:31 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Johan Jonker <jbx6244@...il.com>, heiko@...ech.de,
        zhangqing@...k-chips.com
Cc:     robh+dt@...nel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org, mturquette@...libre.com,
        sboyd@...nel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 13/16] arm64: dts: rockchip: fix compatible string
 rk3328 cru node

On 02/04/2022 16:36, Johan Jonker wrote:
> The rockchip,rk3328-cru.txt file was converted to YAML.
> A DT test of the rk3328 cru node gives notifications regarding
> the compatible string. Bring it in line with the binding by
> removing some unused fall back strings.

I explained to you on your v1, syscon is not a fallback compatible.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Johan Jonker <jbx6244@...il.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328.dtsi | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328.dtsi
> index 9c76c288b..8ceac0388 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3328.dtsi
> @@ -756,7 +756,7 @@
>  	};
>  
>  	cru: clock-controller@...40000 {
> -		compatible = "rockchip,rk3328-cru", "rockchip,cru", "syscon";

Please do not resend the same patch without changes and without
finishing the discussion. This looks wrong (and external references you
gave support this). What does this resend means? Discussion is over?

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ