linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 1/4] dt-bindings: thermal: qcom-tsens: Add ipq5018 compatible

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: <ee19e076-8f9c-c5b2-3e25-2832dbdab25b@linaro.org>
Date:   Tue, 19 Sep 2023 14:32:07 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Sricharan Ramabadhran <quic_srichara@...cinc.com>,
        agross@...nel.org, andersson@...nel.org, konrad.dybcio@...aro.org,
        srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
        thara.gopinath@...il.com, rafael@...nel.org,
        daniel.lezcano@...aro.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/4] dt-bindings: thermal: qcom-tsens: Add ipq5018
 compatible

On 19/09/2023 09:22, Sricharan Ramabadhran wrote:
> 
> 
> On 9/15/2023 6:15 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 15/09/2023 14:43, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 15/09/2023 14:15, Sricharan Ramabadhran wrote:
>>>> IPQ5018 has tsens v1.0 block with 4 sensors and 1 interrupt.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Sricharan Ramabadhran <quic_srichara@...cinc.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>   [v2] Sorted the compatible and removed example
>>>>
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
>>
>> No, unreviewed. Your driver says it is not compatible with
>> qcom,tsens-v1. This does not look right :/
>>
> 
>   Yes it is V1 IP, but since there is no RPM, to enable the IP/SENSORS
>   have to do those steps after calling init_common. Similar reason
>   added a new feat as well in patch #2 as well. Hence for this,
>   new compatible was required.

I dud not write about new or old compatible ("compatible" as noun). I
wrote that it is not compatible ("compatible" as adjective) with v1.

Best regards,
Krzysztof