linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] arm64: dts: ti: k3-am625-sk: Enable on board peripherals

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]

Date:   Mon, 25 Apr 2022 21:02:01 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>, Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>,
        Tero Kristo <kristo@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
Cc:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Aswath Govindraju <a-govindraju@...com>,
        Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] arm64: dts: ti: k3-am625-sk: Enable on board
 peripherals

On 25/04/2022 11:22, Vignesh Raghavendra wrote:
>>> +		/* TPS22918DBVR */
>>> +		compatible = "regulator-fixed";
>>> +		regulator-name = "vdd_mmc1";
>>> +		regulator-min-microvolt = <3300000>;
>>> +		regulator-max-microvolt = <3300000>;
>>> +		regulator-boot-on;
>>> +		enable-active-high;
>>> +		vin-supply = <&vcc_3v3_sys>;
>>> +		gpio = <&exp1 3 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>;
>>> +	};
>>> +
>>> +	vdd_sd_dv: gpio-regulator-TLV71033 {
>>
>> The same + do not mix cases, so regulator-1 or regulator-tlv71033
> 
> I have fixed this in v3. But had one question though:
> 
> Per DT spec, 2.2.3 Path Names seems to indicate node-name-N when N is
> 1,2,3.. So, is it valid to have regulator-tlv71033 as node-name -> does
> not strictly seem to fit into node-name-N format ?

No, "regulator-tlv71033" does not match DT spec. Indeed better to have
some generic suffix, e.g. regulator-vbatt, but strictly speaking DT spec
asks for just "regulator-[0-9]".

However several people prefer such descriptive suffix instead of
"regulator-[0-9]" because it makes their life easier when extending DTSI
(when both DTSI and DTS provide some of such regulators). Therefore I
don't think it's that important to keep with the spec. Rob for example
does not complain here, so probably I am stricter than him.

In any case it would be good to have only suffix or only prefix, e.g.
"regulator-foo-bar" or "foo-bar-regulator", so DT schema can match
against it. Several other types of devices already require such naming.

Best regards,
Krzysztof