linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] arm64: dts: qcom: msm8996-xiaomi-natrium: Add support for Xiaomi Mi 5s Plus

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: <b459bbd2-26c6-1af1-b1ee-d4cf5f49cdaa@linaro.org>
Date:   Thu, 19 May 2022 12:06:53 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Yassine Oudjana <y.oudjana@...tonmail.com>,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>
Cc:     Alec Su <ae40515@...oo.com.tw>, bjorn.andersson@...aro.org,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org,
        sboyd@...eaurora.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] arm64: dts: qcom: msm8996-xiaomi-natrium: Add support
 for Xiaomi Mi 5s Plus

On 19/05/2022 12:01, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 19/05/2022 11:57, Yassine Oudjana wrote:
>>>
>>> There is no such property documented. Either add bindings, or drop.
>>>
>>>> + qcom,board-id = <47 0>;
>>>
>>>
>>> The same.
>>
>> These properties are already used in many device trees; they are
>> needed to let the bootloader pick a DTB, but yes they aren't
>> documented currently. devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml would
>> probably be a good place to put them.
> 
> Which means each person is using them and not caring about
> documenting... they need to be documented. I am not even sure if they
> should be accepted.
> 
> The DTS describes hardware, not bootloader specific details. The
> hardware - board - is defined by compatible and bootloader should use
> it. Adding new properties because someone decided "I don't like
> compatibles" is not appropriate.

There is prior art:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/10/26/651
https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAL_JsqJAOEvs08Jydn9wWtM7-Oxd=MmmDER48VRF7z3Gkzt0CQ@mail.gmail.com/


Best regards,
Krzysztof