linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] dt-binding: ipmi: add fallback to npcm845 compatible

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:   Mon, 8 Aug 2022 09:25:44 +0300
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     minyard@....org, Tomer Maimon <tmaimon77@...il.com>
Cc:     Avi Fishman <avifishman70@...il.com>,
        Tali Perry <tali.perry1@...il.com>,
        Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>,
        Patrick Venture <venture@...gle.com>,
        Nancy Yuen <yuenn@...gle.com>,
        Benjamin Fair <benjaminfair@...gle.com>,
        Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        OpenBMC Maillist <openbmc@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        openipmi-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] dt-binding: ipmi: add fallback to npcm845 compatible

On 07/08/2022 18:05, Corey Minyard wrote:
>> We had a disscation with Arnd, Arnd asked us to use a fallback as we
>> did here if NPCM8XX device module is similar to NPCM7XX module:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220522155046.260146-5-tmaimon77@gmail.com/
>>
>> I think we should use a fallback to describe the NPCM8XX KCS in the
>> dt-binding document.
> 
> I'm ok with that option.  I guess I should have mentioned it.  Add
> nuvoton,npcm-kcs-bmc to the driver's of_device_id table. 

To be clear - NAK. It's not a specific compatible, therefore it is not
appropriate at all.

> Then use that
> in that compatible string in the device tree.  Leave the 750 compatible
> string in the table for backwards compatibility.
> 
> There's no point in having a bunch of those strings if they are all the
> same.  If a new one comes out that is different, we can handle that when
> the time comes.\
There is a point. It's exactly how we do in all DT bindings. It is
recommended by writing bindings document.

Best regards,
Krzysztof