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]

Date:   Tue, 19 Sep 2023 18:18:21 +0530
From:   Sricharan Ramabadhran <quic_srichara@...cinc.com>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
        <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 9/19/2023 6:02 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> 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.
> 

  Ho, in that case, yes it is not compatible with V1 init and features
  because of 'no rpm'. So in that case, should this be documented
  as a separate version of 'V1 without rpm' ?

Regards,
  Sricharan