linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: arm: qcom: document AL02-Cx and AL03-C2 boards based on IPQ9574 family

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: <9e401641-1334-c0bc-c49a-481a8a9af2de@linaro.org>
Date:   Thu, 20 Jul 2023 11:48:02 +0200
From:   Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
        Sridharan S N <quic_sridsn@...cinc.com>, agross@...nel.org,
        andersson@...nel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: arm: qcom: document AL02-Cx and AL03-C2
 boards based on IPQ9574 family

On 20.07.2023 10:49, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 20/07/2023 10:45, Sridharan S N wrote:
>> Document the below listed (Reference Design Platform) RDP boards based on IPQ9574
>> family of SoCs.
>>
>> AL02-C3  - rdp437
>> AL02-C7  - rdp433-mht-phy
>> AL02-C10 - rdp433-mht-switch
>> AL02-C11 - rdp467
>> AL02-C12 - rdp455
>> AL02-C13 - rdp459
>> AL02-C15 - rdp457
>> AL02-C16 - rdp456
>> AL02-C17 - rdp469
>> AL02-C19 - rdp461
>> AL03-C2  - rdp458
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sridharan S N <quic_sridsn@...cinc.com>
>> ---
>>  .../devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml         | 20 +++++++++++++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 20 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
>> index dd66fd872c31..d992261da691 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
>> @@ -89,10 +89,20 @@ description: |
>>          adp
>>          ap-al01-c1
>>          ap-al02-c2
>> +        ap-al02-c3
>>          ap-al02-c6
>>          ap-al02-c7
>>          ap-al02-c8
>>          ap-al02-c9
>> +        ap-al02-c10
>> +        ap-al02-c11
>> +        ap-al02-c12
>> +        ap-al02-c13
>> +        ap-al02-c15
>> +        ap-al02-c16
>> +        ap-al02-c17
>> +        ap-al02-c19
> 
> Why? I asked once, but there was no feedback from Qualcomm.
> 
> Why do we need to do this? What's the point?
Another question would be, whether these boards are just one-off test
prototypes of which there exist like 5-10 units, or are they actually
going to be supported and useful.

If it's the former, I don't think it makes sense to keep the device
trees upstream.

Konrad