linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] dt-bindings: usb: typec: add bindings for stm32g0 controller

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <3d23244e-d926-ad9c-68b6-50ac8b4fd752@linaro.org>
Date:   Wed, 6 Jul 2022 09:06:13 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Fabrice Gasnier <fabrice.gasnier@...s.st.com>, robh+dt@...nel.org
Cc:     krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com,
        amelie.delaunay@...s.st.com, alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] dt-bindings: usb: typec: add bindings for stm32g0
 controller

On 04/07/2022 11:08, Fabrice Gasnier wrote:
> On 7/4/22 09:55, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 01/07/2022 12:04, Fabrice Gasnier wrote:
>>>
>>> Then I no longer get this warning upon build. But the dtbs_check complains:
>>> ---
>>> connector: ports: 'port@0' is a required property
>>> 	From schema: ..
>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/connector/usb-connector.yaml
>>>
>>> So It looks like to me there's something missing to handle the single
>>> port case in usb-connector.yaml, when using the "ports".
>>>
>>> Maybe usb-connector could be updated to handle "port" (w/o unit-addr) ?
>>
>> Not really, the dtc warning looks false-positive. Especially that you
>> need port@1 for USB 3.0 (super speed), unless you do not support it?
> 
> Hi Krzysztof,
> 
> Having USB2.0 High speed port only is perfectly valid. port@1 is
> optional to support USB3.0 as you mention.
> 
> I've no opinion regarding a possible false positive warning. I'd like to
> sort this out, perhaps Rob has some recommendation regarding this ?

I would propose to skip the DTC warning and stick to the schema with
only one port@0.


Best regards,
Krzysztof