linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] arm64: dts: qcom: sc7280: add lpass lpi pin controller node

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 13 Apr 2022 08:51:08 -0700
From:   Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>
To:     Srinivasa Rao Mandadapu <quic_srivasam@...cinc.com>
Cc:     agross@...nel.org, bjorn.andersson@...aro.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, quic_rohkumar@...cinc.com,
        srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org, dianders@...omium.org,
        swboyd@...omium.org, judyhsiao@...omium.org,
        Venkata Prasad Potturu <quic_potturu@...cinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] arm64: dts: qcom: sc7280: add lpass lpi pin
 controller node

On Wed, Apr 13, 2022 at 08:12:20PM +0530, Srinivasa Rao Mandadapu wrote:
> 
> On 4/13/2022 5:29 AM, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> Thanks for your time and valuable suggestions Matthias!!!
> > On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 06:41:25PM +0530, Srinivasa Rao Mandadapu wrote:
> > > On 4/12/2022 6:18 PM, Srinivasa Rao Mandadapu wrote:
> > > > On 4/12/2022 1:02 AM, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> > > > Thanks for your time Matthias!!!
> > > > > On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 07:23:04PM +0530, Srinivasa Rao Mandadapu wrote:
> > > > > > Add LPASS LPI pinctrl node required for Audio functionality on sc7280
> > > > > > based platforms.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Srinivasa Rao Mandadapu <quic_srivasam@...cinc.com>
> > > > > > Co-developed-by: Venkata Prasad Potturu <quic_potturu@...cinc.com>
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Venkata Prasad Potturu <quic_potturu@...cinc.com>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > >    arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dtsi |  84
> > > > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > > >    arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi     | 107
> > > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > > >    2 files changed, 191 insertions(+)
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dtsi
> > > > > > b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dtsi
> > > > > > index 4ba2274..ea751dc 100644
> > > > > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dtsi
> > > > > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dtsi
> > > > > > @@ -238,6 +238,90 @@
> > > > > >        modem-init;
> > > > > >    };
> > > > > >    +&dmic01 {
> > > > > Shouldn't these nodes be in the PINCTRL section at their respective
> > > > > positions in alphabetical order?
> > > > These are not part of tlmm pin control section. These are part of
> > > > lpass_tlmm section.
> > > > 
> > > > In your previous comment you asked to remove &lpass_tlmm. Hence brought
> > > > out.
> > > > 
> > > > > nit: since you are keeping the groups the group names are a bit
> > > > > generic IMO.
> > > > > e.g. it is fairly obvious that 'dmic01_clk' refers to a clock pin,
> > > > > however
> > > > > just 'dmic01' is a bit vague. You could consider adding the prefix
> > > > > 'lpass_'
> > > > > to the group names for more clarity.
> > > > as dmic01 has both clk and data section, I don't think keeping clk is
> > > > appropriate here.
> > > As these nodes are part of SC7280, i.e. qcom specific chipset, I feel lpass_
> > > is redundant.
> > It helps to provide some context about the pins which might not be evident
> > from their short names like 'dmic01' or 'rx_swr'. A nice side effect is that
> > the pins/groups would grouped automatically together in alphabetic ordering.
> > 
> > In terms of 'redundancy' it is similar to 'qup_' prefix for the I2C/SPI/UART
> > pins.
> Agree. Will change accordingly. similarly will append lpass_ torx/tx/va mcro
> device node names.
> > 
> > > If we add lpass_ to all dmic nodes, some node names are too lengthy.
> > The longest would be like 'lpass_dmic01_sleep' or 'lpass_rx_swr_sleep', which
> > doesn't seem outrageous.
> > 
> > In any case it's not super important. If it bothers someone enough later
> > on they can always send a patch that changes it.
> Okay.

I meant to say whether you change it or not is not super important, it's up
to you :)