linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] arm64: dts: qcom: sc8280xp: rename i2c5 to i2c21

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: <Y5iWeTk2zOp9rInx@x1>
Date:   Tue, 13 Dec 2022 10:12:57 -0500
From:   Brian Masney <bmasney@...hat.com>
To:     Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
Cc:     andersson@...nel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org,
        konrad.dybcio@...aro.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        johan+linaro@...nel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        ahalaney@...hat.com, echanude@...hat.com, quic_shazhuss@...cinc.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] arm64: dts: qcom: sc8280xp: rename i2c5 to i2c21

On Tue, Dec 13, 2022 at 03:54:05PM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote:
> Note that the node is labelled qup2_i2c5 and not qup_i2c5.
> 
> That is, the QUP nodes are labelled using two indices, and specifically
> 
> 	qup2_i2c5
> 
> would be another name for
> 
> 	qup_i2c21
> 
> if we'd been using such a flat naming scheme (there are 8 engines per
> QUP).
> 
> So there's nothing wrong with how these nodes are currently named, but
> mixing the two scheme as you are suggesting would not be correct.

Hi Johan,

What would I use for the name in the aliases section? Right now I have:

    aliases {
        i2c18 = &qup2_i2c18;
    }

So qup2_i2c18 becomes qup2_i2c2. Would I use the flat naming scheme for
the alias like so?

    aliases {
        i2c18 = &qup2_i2c2;
    }

Brian