linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] dt-bindings: remoteproc: mediatek: Make l1tcm reg exclusive to mt819x

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:   Wed, 11 May 2022 11:14:16 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Nícolas F. R. A. Prado 
        <nfraprado@...labora.com>
Cc:     Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        AngeloGioacchino Del Regno 
        <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>, kernel@...labora.com,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>,
        Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Tinghan Shen <tinghan.shen@...iatek.com>,
        Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@...gle.com>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] dt-bindings: remoteproc: mediatek: Make l1tcm reg
 exclusive to mt819x

On 11/05/2022 11:12, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 10/05/2022 18:50, Nícolas F. R. A. Prado wrote:
>>>> Also I had to add a description to the global reg-names, since it
>>>> couldn't be neither missing nor empty.
>>>
>>> It is possible:
>>> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/example-schema.yaml#L91
>>>
>>> Keep constraints and list of names in properties. Then in allOf:if:then
>>> raise minItems or lower maxItems, depending on the variant.
>>
>> Hi Krzysztof,
>>
>> that example only shows setting minItems to override the default value, but the
>> issue here is that it's not possible to override minItems/maxItems (after
>> they're already set, even if implicitly) with a different value in the if.
> 
> No, this example shows exactly what you need in first step - make one
> item on the list optional.
> 
> There are several other examples for the entire picture or different
> aproach:
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/example-schema.yaml#L91

Wait, this is the same link... because it exactly matches your case.

Best regards,
Krzysztof