linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/7] gpiolib: of: add a quirk for reset line for Marvell NFC controller

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: <Y0gL/tdaCFOq98uo@maple.lan>
Date:   Thu, 13 Oct 2022 14:00:46 +0100
From:   Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>
To:     Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
Cc:     Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] gpiolib: of: add a quirk for reset line for Marvell
 NFC controller

On Wed, Oct 12, 2022 at 11:55:36AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2022 at 07:50:49PM +0100, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 12, 2022 at 11:45:02AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 12, 2022 at 11:29:02AM +0100, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 03:19:32PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > > > The controller is using non-standard "reset-n-io" name for its reset
> > > > > gpio property, whereas gpiod API expects "<name>-gpios". Add a quirk
> > > > > so that gpiod API will still work on unmodified DTSes.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
> > > >
> > > > How/when has/will the DT bindings documentation for this hardware be
> > > > updated to describe the new bindings?
> > > >
> > > > Delivering the quirks ahead of driver updates is great for avoiding
> > > > merge conflicts but it also conceals the rename from reviewers so
> > > > risks neglecting to update the bindings.
> > >
> > > I was planning on sending binding updates once driver patches land.
> >
> > I'd have a (weak) preference for them being shared in the same patchset.
> > Maintainers can either ack or the changes can land seperately but
> > having them in the same patchset helps avoid having to quibble or check!
>
> OK, so how about once we agree and land this patchset to gpiolib I can
> blast driver patches + binding patches together?

That's good for me!


Daniel.