linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add bindings for the Synquacer platform

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: <661800ab-c363-49f2-4889-c458a7b298c4@linaro.org>
Date:   Fri, 16 Jun 2023 22:34:55 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@...aro.org>
Cc:     devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, robh@...nel.org,
        ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org, masahisa.kojima@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: arm: socionext: add bindings for the
 Synquacer platform

On 16/06/2023 22:06, Jassi Brar wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Jun 2023 at 11:47, Krzysztof Kozlowski
> <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 16/06/2023 18:23, Jassi Brar wrote:
>>> On Fri, 16 Jun 2023 at 05:15, Krzysztof Kozlowski
>>> <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 16/06/2023 05:58, jaswinder.singh@...aro.org wrote:
>>>>> From: Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@...aro.org>
>>>>>
>>>>> Socionext's DeveloperBox is based on the SC2A11B SoC (Synquacer).
>>>>> Specify bindings for the platform and boards based on that.
>>>>
>>>> A nit, subject: drop second/last, redundant "bindings". The
>>>> "dt-bindings" prefix is already stating that these are bindings.
>>>>
>>> I can remove it, but I see many mentions like "Fix bindings for"  "Add
>>> binding for" etc in the subject line.
>>
>> Can we fix them as well?
>>
> ??

What else I can say to such argument?

> 
> 
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Binding without it's user is usually useless. Where is the user?
>>>>
>>> It is required for SystemReady-2.0 certification.
>>
>> For what? If there is no user, it is not required for SR. We don't
>> document compatibles for something which does not exist in the projects.
>>
> The dts/dtsi for synquacer will be added later.
> I am sure you are aware that there are countless bindings without
> actual use in any dts/dtsi.

Bindings without user (so no DTSI and no driver)? Just few, not countless.

> When exactly did it become mandatory to
> have dts/dtsi for the bindings to be merged upstream?

It was always. We do not want/need to document downstream stuff or
anything  just because it is somewhere there.

Best regards,
Krzysztof