linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 03/11] dt-bindings: mmc: Add Pensando Elba SoC binding

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: <CAK9rFnwjeaGALTaDx-0k2OEktSv_UmJK9+uGuy=OFP8dnhNeOQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 25 May 2022 08:46:15 -0700
From:   Brad Larson <brad@...sando.io>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:     Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@...il.com>,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
        Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
        David Clear <dac2@...sando.io>,
        "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-spi <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-mmc <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
        DTML <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/11] dt-bindings: mmc: Add Pensando Elba SoC binding

Hi Arnd,

On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 11:31 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2022 at 1:36 AM Brad Larson <brad@...sando.io> wrote:
> >
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/cdns,sdhci.yaml
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/cdns,sdhci.yaml
> > @@ -19,10 +19,12 @@ properties:
> >        - enum:
> >            - microchip,mpfs-sd4hc
> >            - socionext,uniphier-sd4hc
> > +          - pensando,elba-sd4hc
> >        - const: cdns,sd4hc
> >
> >    reg:
> > -    maxItems: 1
> > +    minItems: 1
> > +    maxItems: 2
> >
>
> Shouldn't the binding describe what the register areas are? If there
> is only one of them, it is fairly clear, but when you have the choice
> between one and two, it gets ambiguous, and there is a risk that
> another SoC might have a different register area in the second entry,
> making it incompatible.

Thanks for the review.  Changing this to allOf:if:then in updated
patchset.  The second item is particular to Elba SoC.

Regards,
Brad