linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] dt-bindings: rtc: add max313xx RTCs

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, 4 Apr 2023 10:14:33 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>
Cc:     Ibrahim Tilki <Ibrahim.Tilki@...log.com>, a.zummo@...ertech.it,
        jdelvare@...e.com, linux@...ck-us.net, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        Zeynep Arslanbenzer <Zeynep.Arslanbenzer@...log.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] dt-bindings: rtc: add max313xx RTCs

On 04/04/2023 09:44, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
>>
>>> charging will always
>>> enable a diode, select a resistor and then have or not an extra diode.
>>> Figure2 of the MAX31329 datasheet is great.
>>
>> So the diode is in the max313xx? Then why enabling it is a property of
>> DT? Either this should be inferred from compatible or is even a policy,
>> not a DT property. Just because device has a register for something, is
>> not an argument that "something" should be in DT.
> 
> Well, it depends on the battery that is installed on the board so it
> makes sense to have it in DT.

OK, that would be a good reason, but I wonder why? Why choosing diode or
not depends on the battery? Wouldn't you always want to have the diode?

Best regards,
Krzysztof