linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: nvmem: layouts: add fixed-layout

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, 9 Mar 2023 10:47:34 +0100
From:   Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@...il.com>
To:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>
Cc:     Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
        Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Rafał Miłecki <rafal@...ecki.pl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: nvmem: layouts: add fixed-layout

On 9.03.2023 10:34, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> With the introduction of NVMEM layouts I believe we should prefer and
> support describing all NVMEM devices content in the "nvmem-layout" node.
> Inluding fixed NVMEM cells (those with hardcoded offset & size).
> 
> This seems to be cleaner design and more explicit.
> 
> Introduce a binding allowing fixed NVMEM cells as a type of layout.

While this is obvious to me I should make it clear anyway:

We must not break backward compatibility. Old binding should remain
supported. We may want to deprecate old binding but we have to support
existing DT files.