linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 06/43] dt-bindings: phy: qcom,qmp: split out msm8996-qmp-pcie-phy

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: <1053b27f-37f8-a94d-2868-1e2b200d822a@linaro.org>
Date:   Tue, 5 Jul 2022 12:23:07 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
Cc:     Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@...nel.org>,
        Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/43] dt-bindings: phy: qcom,qmp: split out
 msm8996-qmp-pcie-phy

On 05/07/2022 12:20, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 05, 2022 at 12:08:36PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 05/07/2022 11:42, Johan Hovold wrote:
>>> The QMP PHY DT schema is getting unwieldy. Break out the odd-bird
>>> msm8996-qmp-pcie-phy which is the only QMP PHY that uses separate
>>> "per-lane" nodes.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@...nel.org>
>>> ---
>>>  .../phy/qcom,msm8996-qmp-pcie-phy.yaml        | 114 ++++++++++++++++++
>>>  .../devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,qmp-phy.yaml |  32 -----
>>>  2 files changed, 114 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
>>>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,msm8996-qmp-pcie-phy.yaml
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,msm8996-qmp-pcie-phy.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,msm8996-qmp-pcie-phy.yaml
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 000000000000..14fd86fd91ec
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,msm8996-qmp-pcie-phy.yaml
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,114 @@
>>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause)
>>> +
>>
>> No line break
>>
>>> +%YAML 1.2
>>> +---
>>> +$id: "http://devicetree.org/schemas/phy/qcom,msm8996-qmp-pcie-phy.yaml#"
>>> +$schema: "http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#"
>>
>> Drop the quotes from two above.
> 
> This comes from the current binding. I can clean that one up first.

You now selectively copy pieces from old binding into new one. Copy
while correcting obvious issues.

> 
>>> +
>>> +title: Qualcomm QMP PHY controller (MSM8996 PCIe)
>>> +
>>> +maintainers:
>>> +  - Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>
>>> +
>>> +description:
>>> +  QMP PHY controller supports physical layer functionality for a number of
>>> +  controllers on Qualcomm chipsets, such as, PCIe, UFS, and USB.
>>> +
>>> +properties:
>>> +  compatible:
>>> +    const: qcom,msm8996-qmp-pcie-phy
>>> +
>>> +  reg:
>>> +    minItems: 1
>>> +    items:
>>> +      - description: Address and length of PHY's common serdes block.
>>> +      - description: Address and length of PHY's DP_COM control block.
>>
>> Are two reg items applicable here?
> 
> No, but see below.
> 
>>> +
>>> +  "#address-cells":
>>> +    enum: [ 1, 2 ]
>>> +
>>> +  "#size-cells":
>>> +    enum: [ 1, 2 ]
>>> +
>>> +  ranges: true
>>> +
>>> +  clocks:
>>> +    minItems: 1
>>> +    maxItems: 4
>>
>> Define clocks here, not in allOf:if:then.
> 
> To remain sane, and to help reviewers, I decided not to do changes to
> the binding while splitting it up which would only make them harder
> to review.
> 
> Hence the split followed by cleanup/tightening of constraints.

It's confusing. I look at this commit and it is not correct. How do I
know that next commits will correct it? I responded in further patches
that most of them they should be squashed with this copy.

> 
>> How about an example?
> 
> That's also a new addition to the binding and goes in a later separate
> patch.
> 



Best regards,
Krzysztof