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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2022 01:14:00 +0300 From: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org> To: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@...cinc.com> Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>, Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>, Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>, Bhupesh Sharma <bhupesh.sharma@...aro.org>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] dt-bindings: firmware: scm: Add QDU1000/QRU1000 compatibles On Tue, 4 Oct 2022 at 01:02, Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@...cinc.com> wrote: > > > On 10/1/2022 4:25 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > On 01/10/2022 05:06, Melody Olvera wrote: > >> Add compatibles for scm driver for QDU1000 and QRU1000 platforms. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@...cinc.com> > >> --- > >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml | 2 ++ > >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml > >> index c5b76c9f7ad0..b47a5dda3c3e 100644 > >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml > >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/qcom,scm.yaml > >> @@ -51,6 +51,8 @@ properties: > >> - qcom,scm-sm8250 > >> - qcom,scm-sm8350 > >> - qcom,scm-sm8450 > >> + - qcom,scm-qdu1000 > >> + - qcom,scm-qru1000 I think after seeing all the patchsets it's time to ask the following question. Do we really need a duplicate compatibility families: qdu1000 vs qru1000? I'd suggest using a single set of compatibile strings in most of the cases. Settle down onto a single name (qdu,qru, qdru, whatever) and define distinct compat strings only when there is an actual difference? E.g .we don't have separate compatible strings for all the sda660, apq8096, etc. unless this is required by the corresponding hardware block not being compatible with corresponding sdm or msm counterpart. > > Items should be ordered alphabetically. > Will fix. > > > >> - qcom,scm-qcs404 > >> - const: qcom,scm > > Patch is incomplete. Missing changes for allOf. > Will add. > > > >> > > Best regards, > > Krzysztof > > Thanks, > > Melody > -- With best wishes Dmitry
Powered by blists - more mailing lists