linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] dt-bindings: soc: qcom,rpmh-rsc: Update to allow for generic nodes

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]

Date:   Thu, 27 Oct 2022 11:08:25 -0400
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@...cinc.com>,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>
Cc:     linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] dt-bindings: soc: qcom,rpmh-rsc: Update to allow
 for generic nodes

On 26/10/2022 16:04, Melody Olvera wrote:
> Update the bindings to allow for generic regulator nodes instead of
> device-specific node names.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@...cinc.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/qcom,rpmh-rsc.yaml | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/qcom,rpmh-rsc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/qcom,rpmh-rsc.yaml
> index 4a50f1d27724..0e7e07975f3a 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/qcom,rpmh-rsc.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/qcom,rpmh-rsc.yaml
> @@ -109,7 +109,7 @@ properties:
>      $ref: /schemas/power/qcom,rpmpd.yaml#
>  
>  patternProperties:
> -  '-regulators$':
> +  'regulators$':

This should be rather fixed like:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-devicetree/20220926092104.111449-1-krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org/

I don't know why there is such a popularity of adding specific model
names as device node names...

Best regards,
Krzysztof