linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 06/14] dt-bindings: soc: qcom: smd-rpm: Use qcom,rpm-proc in example

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: <ZH2ox9ZaGPDR-Xvt@gerhold.net>
Date:   Mon, 5 Jun 2023 11:20:07 +0200
From:   Stephan Gerhold <stephan@...hold.net>
To:     Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc:     devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org,
        Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/14] dt-bindings: soc: qcom: smd-rpm: Use qcom,rpm-proc
 in example

On Mon, Jun 05, 2023 at 02:33:58AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Jun 2023 09:08:22 +0200, Stephan Gerhold wrote:
> > Use the new top-level rpm-proc node instead of having a dummy top-level
> > /smd node that only contains the RPM but not other remote processors.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Stephan Gerhold <stephan@...hold.net>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/qcom,smd-rpm.yaml | 6 +++---
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > 
> 
> My bot found errors running 'make DT_CHECKER_FLAGS=-m dt_binding_check'
> on your patch (DT_CHECKER_FLAGS is new in v5.13):
> 
> yamllint warnings/errors:
> 
> dtschema/dtc warnings/errors:
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/qcom,smd-rpm.example.dtb: /example-0/remoteproc-rpm: failed to match any schema with compatible: ['qcom,msm8916-rpm-proc', 'qcom,rpm-proc']
> 

Huh? The schema that matches this compatible is in the previous patch. :)
Perhaps this error is related to the dt_binding_check problem on the
patch before (which is caused by applying the patches to the wrong base
branch).

Before sending this series I verified that there are no dt_binding_check
and dtbs_check warnings or errors when applied to the correct branch.

Thanks,
Stephan