linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 10/15] dt-bindings: phy: qcom,qmp-pcie: add sc8280xp bindings

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Y07Kdo5oG4gw82k4@hovoldconsulting.com>
Date:   Tue, 18 Oct 2022 17:47:02 +0200
From:   Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
Cc:     Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@...nel.org>,
        Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>, Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...ainline.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/15] dt-bindings: phy: qcom,qmp-pcie: add sc8280xp
 bindings

On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 11:22:13AM -0400, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 18/10/2022 05:40, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 01:20:49PM -0400, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >> On 17/10/2022 10:53, Johan Hovold wrote:
> >>> Add bindings for the PCIe QMP PHYs found on SC8280XP.

> >>> --- /dev/null
> >>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,qmp-pcie-phy.yaml
> >>
> >> Filename based on compatible, so for example:
> >>
> >> qcom,sc8280xp-qmp-pcie-phy.yaml
> > 
> > Ok, but as I mentioned in my reply to the previous patch, this file is
> > the one that is expected to be extended with new bindings.
> 
> I would still propose to use compatible of this series and treat it as a
> family name of compatible or similar devices. What other choice we have?
> 
> If new (third) PHY bindings appear, then rename older to "-legacies" and
> this one to "-legacy"?

We could also continue using

	qcom,qmp-pcie-phy.yaml

for the latest generic binding were new devices should be added and
rename the "deprecated" ones after one of the compatibles to make it
sound less generic.

But I get your point.
	
> > I can't seem to find where this naming scheme is documented now even if
> > I'm quite sure I've seen it before. Do you have a pointer?
> 
> If you need the source of authority, then:
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/YlhkwvGdcf4ozTzG@robh.at.kernel.org/
> 
> If you need unofficial documentation, then slides here:
> https://osseu2022.sched.com/event/15z0W
> 
> If you need something official, that's on TODO list. :)

Heh. Ok.

> > And does this imply that the file name should also include the gen infix
> > of one of the original compatibles (e.g.
> > "qcom,sc8280xp-qmp-gen3x4-pcie-phy.yaml")?
> 
> Since you already have here three compatibles, you cannot have one
> filename matching exactly all of them, so we already accept something
> generic. Therefore I proposed the common part - matching SoC component.

Yeah, that's what I was alluding too. As soon you add one more SoC to
the same document, the common part is no longer

	qcom,sc8280xp-qmp-pcie-phy

but rather

	qcom,qmp-pcie-phy

Johan