linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 03/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix tcu timer as reported by dtbscheck

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: <2729b85b-1c54-d446-baf4-2c41bb04b3b2@linaro.org>
Date:   Sat, 9 Apr 2022 15:22:03 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     "H. Nikolaus Schaller" <hns@...delico.com>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Paul Cercueil <paul@...pouillou.net>,
        Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, letux-kernel@...nphoenux.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/18] MIPS: DTS: jz4780: fix tcu timer as reported by
 dtbscheck

On 09/04/2022 15:18, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> 
> Well, again, my assumption is that bindings and .yaml files formally describe the actual
> hardware components. And they have been reviewed.

The bindings try to describe it. They are pretty often incomplete or
might have mistakes. The true reason of doing a change is not that some
tool tells you "do like this". The true reason is because the change
properly describes hardware.

> 
> So they have a higher level of authority than any current driver or .dts implementation.
> Unless there is evidence that the bindings are wrong.

This is just a tool, not an authority.

> I.e. if the bindings feel right why is there a need to argue for that?

Because doing things "just because bindings told me" hides the true
explanation and makes the code review, code management more difficult.
Later person will look at this and wonder why this was done like this.
If you write "because some tool me" this is not a good help. But if you
write "because hardware is like this exactly" this is proper comment.

> 
> It is like test-driven development model. There you have to write code that passes
> the tests. Not argue against the tests.

Again, don't focus on the tool... Tool is just a tool...

Best regards,
Krzysztof