linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/6] dt-bindings: nvmem: sec-qfprom: Add bindings for secure qfprom

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 26 Jun 2023 15:38:51 +0530
From:   Komal Bajaj <quic_kbajaj@...cinc.com>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>
CC:     <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/6] dt-bindings: nvmem: sec-qfprom: Add bindings for
 secure qfprom



On 6/26/2023 3:16 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 26/06/2023 11:02, Komal Bajaj wrote:
>>
>> On 6/26/2023 2:00 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 26/06/2023 10:22, Komal Bajaj wrote:
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +allOf:
>>>>>> +  - $ref: nvmem.yaml#
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +properties:
>>>>>> +  compatible:
>>>>>> +    items:
>>>>>> +      - enum:
>>>>>> +          - qcom,qdu1000-sec-qfprom
>>>>>> +      - const: qcom,sec-qfprom
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +  reg:
>>>>>> +    items:
>>>>>> +      - description: The secure qfprom corrected region.
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +  # Needed if any child nodes are present.
>>>>>> +  "#address-cells":
>>>>>> +    const: 1
>>>>>> +  "#size-cells":
>>>>>> +    const: 1
>>>>> Drop both, they are not needed.
>>>> I didn't get it. Can you please explain why these are not needed as this
>>>> node will have child nodes which will use single value for address and size.
>>> I suspect they are already defined. Do other bindings (for cases with
>>> children) have them? If not, why here it would be different?
>> Yes, I see there are bindings that has these properties, listed a few of
>> them below -
>>
>> [1]
>> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/nvmem/qcom,qfprom.yaml
> Please work on current development. It's a bit of waste of time to
> review old code...

Okay sorry for that, will work on this.

Thanks
Komal
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230611140330.154222-16-srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org/
>
>> [2]
>> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/firmware/arm,scmi.yaml
> That's not a nvmem provider.
>
>> [3]
>> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/timer/arm,arch_timer_mmio.yaml
> That's not a nvmem provider.
>
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>