linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] dt-bindings: mediatek: watchdog: Fix compatible fallbacks and example

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]

Date:   Thu, 11 Aug 2022 17:56:35 +0800
From:   Allen-KH Cheng <allen-kh.cheng@...iatek.com>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
        "Nícolas F. R. A. Prado" <nfraprado@...labora.com>
CC:     Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
        Chen-Yu Tsai <wenst@...omium.org>,
        Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>,
        "Guenter Roeck" <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        "Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
        <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
        <Project_Global_Chrome_Upstream_Group@...iatek.com>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] dt-bindings: mediatek: watchdog: Fix compatible
 fallbacks and example

he SoC-specific compatibles Hi Krzysztof,

On Wed, 2022-08-10 at 19:50 +0300, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 10/08/2022 15:58, Allen-KH Cheng wrote:
> > I agree the advantage of patch is aesthetic. Since I also want to
> > send
> > another "watchdog: Convert binding to YAML" PATCH, it's better let
> > all
> > wdt compatibles in the binding match the contents of mtk_wdt_dt_ids
> > in
> > drivers/watchdog/mtk_wdt.c
> > 
> > static const struct of_device_id mtk_wdt_dt_ids[] = {
> > 	{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt2712-wdt", .data = &mt2712_data },
> > 	{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt6589-wdt" },
> > 	{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt7986-wdt", .data = &mt7986_data },
> > 	{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt8183-wdt", .data = &mt8183_data },
> > 	{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt8186-wdt", .data = &mt8186_data },
> > 	{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt8192-wdt", .data = &mt8192_data },
> > 	{ .compatible = "mediatek,mt8195-wdt", .data = &mt8195_data },
> > 	{ /* sentinel */ }
> > };
> > 
> > We have "mediatek,mt8186-wdt" "mediatek,mt8195-wdt" and
> > "mediatek,mt7986-wdt" now and they have their DT data for the reset
> > control.
> > 
> > It's weird and unuseful to add "mediatek,mt6589-wdt" as fallback. 
> > 
> > 
> > Please kindly let me know if I missed anything
> 
> How the driver arranges it should not be a reason to use or not to
> use
> specific fallback. Although Rob acked it, but I still think you did
> not
> provide valid reason for the change.
> 
> Valid reason is usually the actual hardware (so they are actually not
> compatible with mt6589), not exactly how once someone did it in the
> driver.
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof

Thank you for your detailed and clear explanation.

"mediatek,mt6589-wdt" provides the mtk watchdog support and the SoC-
specific compatibles is for reset controls to standard wdt.

"mediatek,mt6589-wdt" is compatible with mt8186, mt8195 and mt7986 and
just not support the reset controls. 

Based on the discussion of email thread, please drop my series.


Thanks to everyone for your comments.

Best regards,
Allen