linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] ARM: dts: Add Chameleon v3 video node

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: <e9fe352a-92fc-023b-8ce2-9a82cbeaada9@linaro.org>
Date:   Tue, 4 Jul 2023 18:23:10 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Paweł Anikiel <pan@...ihalf.com>
Cc:     Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
        dinguyen@...nel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
        mchehab@...nel.org, upstream@...ihalf.com, amstan@...omium.org,
        ribalda@...omium.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] ARM: dts: Add Chameleon v3 video node

On 04/07/2023 18:16, Paweł Anikiel wrote:
>>>>> +     soc {
>>>>> +             video@...60500 {
>>>>> +                     compatible = "google,chv3-video";
>>>>
>>>> This compatible does not seem to be documented & I did not see a comment
>>>> about the lack of a binding in the cover letter. What am I missing?
>>>
>>> Yes, the compatible is not documented for now (I'll do that in a later
>>> patchset), sorry for not mentioning that in the cover letter.
>>
>> You cannot add undocumented compatible. This cannot be fixed in "a later
>> patchset".
> 
> I meant later revision, I'm certainly not expecting this one to land
> (I sent is as an RFC).

That's not clear. RFC is interpreted differently by different people.
Some just ignore it entirely, some still review.

> Is it really necessary to document the
> compatible to get any form of feedback on the overall structure of the
> driver?

Depends on the person. Anyway no problem for me - I will just ignore the
patchset.

Best regards,
Krzysztof