linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 03/12] arm64: dts: ti: k3-j721e-beagleboneai64: Fixup reference to phandles array

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:   Mon, 5 Jun 2023 22:31:17 +0530
From:   "Kumar, Udit" <u-kumar1@...com>
To:     Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
CC:     <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Tero Kristo <kristo@...nel.org>,
        Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
        Robert Nelson <robertcnelson@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/12] arm64: dts: ti: k3-j721e-beagleboneai64: Fixup
 reference to phandles array

Hi Nishanth

On 6/1/2023 8:56 PM, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> When referring to array of phandles, using <> to separate the array
> entries is better notation as it makes potential errors with phandle and
> cell arguments easier to catch. Fix the outliers to be consistent with
> the rest of the usage.
>
> Cc: Robert Nelson <robertcnelson@...il.com>
> Signed-off-by: Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>
> ---
>   .../boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-beagleboneai64.dts   | 29 ++++++++++---------
>   1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-beagleboneai64.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-beagleboneai64.dts
> index 37c24b077b6a..c13246a9ed8f 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-beagleboneai64.dts
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/ti/k3-j721e-beagleboneai64.dts
> @@ -593,7 +593,7 @@ &main_i2c0 {
>   &main_i2c1 {
>   	status = "okay";
>   	pinctrl-names = "default";
> -	pinctrl-0 = <&main_i2c1_pins_default &csi1_gpio_pins_default>;
> +	pinctrl-0 = <&main_i2c1_pins_default>, <&csi1_gpio_pins_default>;
>   	clock-frequency = <400000>;
>   };
>   
> @@ -623,7 +623,7 @@ &main_i2c4 {
>   &main_i2c5 {
>   	status = "okay";
>   	pinctrl-names = "default";
> -	pinctrl-0 = <&main_i2c5_pins_default &csi0_gpio_pins_default>;
> +	pinctrl-0 = <&main_i2c5_pins_default>, <&csi0_gpio_pins_default>;
>   	clock-frequency = <400000>;
>   };
>   
> @@ -639,7 +639,7 @@ &main_i2c6 {
>   &wkup_i2c0 {
>   	status = "okay";
>   	pinctrl-names = "default";
> -	pinctrl-0 = <&wkup_i2c0_pins_default &eeprom_wp_pins_default>;
> +	pinctrl-0 = <&wkup_i2c0_pins_default>, <&eeprom_wp_pins_default>;
>   	clock-frequency = <400000>;

Why we need more than 2 pio lines for i2c node ,


> [...]
>