linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/5] dt-bindings: firmware: arm,scmi: Add support for syspower protocol

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: <23436455-098f-6e21-2330-d91158a591ad@kernel.org>
Date:   Fri, 23 Dec 2022 12:22:34 +0100
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To:     Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        sudeep.holla@....com, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] dt-bindings: firmware: arm,scmi: Add support for
 syspower protocol

On 23/12/2022 11:37, Cristian Marussi wrote:

>>>  
>>> +  protocol@12:
>>> +    type: object
>>> +    properties:
>>> +      reg:
>>> +        const: 0x12
>>> +
>>
>> Why? It did not got lost, it's already covered by pattern. If you refer
>> to particular warning, please paste it in commit msg. Otherwise it looks
>> incorrect.
>>
> 
> Yes indeed, but as a matter of fact it seemed to me that we used to add an
> entry and an example for all the currently published standard SCMI protocols,
> even though already covered by the patternProp (which covers also any
> custom-vendor protocol in the wild) and not sporting any additional
> custom properties (see protocol@18), but maybe this is just a unneeded wrong
> habit adding only cruft to the bindings.
> 
> If you think it does not add any value I can happily drop this, or
> limiting the addition just to the example (and/or drop equally the unneeded
> protocol@18 node too in this case).

Duplicating the node (once in properties, second in patternProperties)
is not needed. I am also not sure what would be the point to add to the
example - example does not have to be complete DTS for all cases, but
illustrate the binding and allow is to test it.

Best regards,
Krzysztof