linux-kernel - Re: [RESEND PATCH v9 1/3] dt-bindings: mfd: Convert atmel-flexcom to json-schema

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: <98ab5118-aa32-af20-a732-dcb5e362717b@linaro.org>
Date:   Tue, 13 Sep 2022 11:15:03 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Kavyasree.Kotagiri@...rochip.com, robh@...nel.org
Cc:     Claudiu.Beznea@...rochip.com, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org,
        Nicolas.Ferre@...rochip.com, lee@...nel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        Sergiu.Moga@...rochip.com
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v9 1/3] dt-bindings: mfd: Convert atmel-flexcom to
 json-schema

On 13/09/2022 07:29, Kavyasree.Kotagiri@...rochip.com wrote:
>>>>> flexcom@...18000: spi@400: Unevaluated properties are not allowed
>>>> ('dma-
>>>>> names', 'dmas' were unexpected)
>>>>>         arch/arm/boot/dts/at91-kizbox3-hs.dtb
>>>>>         arch/arm/boot/dts/at91-sama5d27_som1_ek.dtb
>>>>>         arch/arm/boot/dts/at91-sama5d27_wlsom1_ek.dtb
>>>>>         arch/arm/boot/dts/at91-sama5d2_icp.dtb
>>>>>         arch/arm/boot/dts/at91-sama5d2_ptc_ek.dtb
>>>>>         arch/arm/boot/dts/at91-sama5d2_xplained.dtb
>>>>
>>>> dma properties for spi node is already being covered by Sergiu in below
>>>> patch:
>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/b4625526-8f9b-ada8-f854-
>>>> 751a48545576@...aro.org/
>>>>
>>> Hi Rob, Please let me know your comments.
>>
>> this means it cannot be currently tested. Are you sure that there are no
>> warnings in all DTBs with your patches?
>>
> Yes, I ran dtbs_check. I don’t see any warnings.

Then the warning could be probably ignored (I assume it is really fixed
when both patchsets land).


Best regards,
Krzysztof