linux-kernel - Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] dt-bindings: uwb: Device tree information for Nxp SR1XX SOCs

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: <e1e89092-272e-3cca-6459-f129d8c5627c@linaro.org>
Date:   Fri, 7 Oct 2022 14:30:50 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Manjunatha Venkatesh <manjunatha.venkatesh@....com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        robh+dt@...nel.org
Cc:     mb@...htnvm.io, ckeepax@...nsource.cirrus.com, arnd@...db.d,
        mst@...hat.com, javier@...igon.com, mikelley@...rosoft.com,
        jasowang@...hat.com, sunilmut@...rosoft.com,
        bjorn.andersson@...aro.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, ashish.deshpande@....com,
        rvmanjumce@...il.com
Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] dt-bindings: uwb: Device tree
 information for Nxp SR1XX SOCs

On 07/10/2022 13:39, Manjunatha Venkatesh wrote:
> 
> On 9/14/2022 8:06 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> Caution: EXT Email
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 14, 2022, at 4:29 PM, Manjunatha Venkatesh wrote:
>>> +
>>> +properties:
>>> +  compatible:
>>> +    enum:
>>> +      - nxp,sr1xx
>>> +
>> You should not have wildcard names in the compatible string.
>> Make this a specific model number without 'xx', and
>> have the devices list their own name along with the oldest
>> one they are compatible with.
>>
>>       Arnd
> This driver is common for both sr100 and sr150,so we have used sr1xx
> naming convention or can we use name with highest version(sr150)?

In general each device needs its compatible, so you would need two of
them. However if one is compatible with the other, then express it as
well. IOW, driver binds to one compatible, binding describes both (one
as fallback). There are many, many of such examples in the kernel.

Best regards,
Krzysztof