linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/10] dt: bindings: clock: add mtmips SoCs clock device tree binding documentation

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:   Tue, 21 Mar 2023 11:33:46 +0300
From:   Arınç ÜNAL <arinc.unal@...nc9.com>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
        Sergio Paracuellos <sergio.paracuellos@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
        tsbogend@...ha.franken.de, john@...ozen.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, p.zabel@...gutronix.de,
        mturquette@...libre.com, sboyd@...nel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, matthias.bgg@...il.com,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] dt: bindings: clock: add mtmips SoCs clock device
 tree binding documentation

On 21.03.2023 11:27, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 21/03/2023 09:24, Arınç ÜNAL wrote:
>>>>
>>>> If we take the calling new things mediatek route, we will never get to
>>>> the bottom of fixing the naming inconsistency.
>>>
>>> All new things, so new SoCs, should be called mediatek, because there is
>>> no ralink and mediatek is already used for them. So why some new
>>> Mediatek SoCs are "mediatek" but some other also new SoCs are "ralink"?
>>>
>>> You can do nothing (and no actual need) about existing inconsistency...
>>
>> I couldn't change ralink -> mediatek because company acquisitions don't
>> grant the change. I don't see any reason to prevent changing mediatek ->
>> ralink without breaking the ABI on the existing schemas.
> 
> You cannot change mediatek->ralink without breaking the ABI for the same
> reasons.

Then this is where I ask for an exception.

The current solution only complicates things more.

https://github.com/paraka/linux/pull/1/files#diff-0ae6c456898d08536ce987c32f23f2eb6f4a0f7c38bff9a61bdf3d0daa3f6549R21

Arınç