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: <Y5iaDP+nV9B59U2b@hovoldconsulting.com>
Date:   Tue, 13 Dec 2022 16:28:12 +0100
From:   Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
To:     Brian Masney <bmasney@...hat.com>
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 10:12:57AM -0500, Brian Masney wrote:
> 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;
>     }

Or perhaps the i2c controllers should use a zero-based index instead of
being named after the serial engines (e.g. as we do for the console
uart).

How are they named in the schematics?

Johan