linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ASoC: dt-bindings: wm8753: Convert to dtschema

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: <98da9a32-9771-1002-f323-909e8b49a536@linaro.org>
Date:   Sun, 16 Apr 2023 20:51:13 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Saalim Quadri <danascape@...il.com>
Cc:     alsa-devel@...a-project.org, broonie@...nel.org,
        daniel.baluta@....com, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, lgirdwood@...il.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, patches@...nsource.cirrus.com,
        robh+dt@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: dt-bindings: wm8753: Convert to dtschema

On 16/04/2023 09:35, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 15/04/2023 22:12, Saalim Quadri wrote:
>>> You choose unusual bindings to convert to DT schema. It is fine but
>>> honestly, less useful, with limited impact. This is an old, 12 year old
>>> binding without users. Maybe it would be even removed by now...
>>> I suggest converting ones which have a real impact - have users in DTS.
>>> Otherwise you will be putting quite a lot of effort for no real gains...
>>> because what is the difference between this binding being TXT and DT schema?
>>
>> I am converting these bindings as part of my GSoC project where I need to convert
>> as many files as possible during the given tenure, I am slowly trying to read files
>> in other subsystems too and will push patches for other subsystems too.
>> Is it fine?
> 
> In general it is fine. I wonder if we can change the goal of GSoC? I am
> surprised that such goal was chosen in the first place. Converting old,
> unused bindings to DT schema is okay, but it would be much better to do
> this for the bindings which are actually used.
> 
> Because I still wonder - what is the difference between this binding
> being TXT and DT schema?

BTW,

If you want to find used bindings and tasks to do, check Rob's bot output:

https://gitlab.com/robherring/linux-dt/-/jobs/4118960859
https://gitlab.com/robherring/linux-dt/-/jobs/4118960858

I pointed to these jobs two months ago when Daniel was looking for some
feedback.

Best regards,
Krzysztof