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:   Wed, 25 Oct 2023 09:04:08 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <>
To:     Sebastian Fricke <>
Cc:     Rob Herring <>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <>,
        NXP Linux Team <>,
        Conor Dooley <>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <>,
        Jackson Lee <>,
        Hans Verkuil <>,
        Sascha Hauer <>,
        Pengutronix Kernel Team <>,
        Shawn Guo <>,
        Philipp Zabel <>,
        Nas Chung <>,
        Fabio Estevam <>,, Tomasz Figa <>,,
        Nicolas Dufresne <>,, Robert Beckett <>,,,
        Darren Etheridge <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 6/8] media: dt-bindings: wave5: add Chips&Media 521c
 codec IP support

On 25/10/2023 08:17, Sebastian Fricke wrote:
> Hey Krzysztof,
> On 24.10.2023 09:24, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 24/10/2023 07:17, Sebastian Fricke wrote:
>>>>>> It needs an SoC specific compatible (TI something...) as well (or
>>>>>> instead). Unless there's a public spec with details on how many
>>>>>> clocks, resets, interrupts, etc. there are.
>>>>> Okay so how about this, a bit similar to the Coda driver supplying both
>>>>> a general option and a SoC specific version:
>>>> Can generic compatible be used alone in board designs? If it is licensed
>>>> block, then most likely you want a fallback.
>>> Alright, so a fallback seems appropriate, how do you like this?
>>> properties:
>>>    compatible:
>>>      items:
>>>        - enum:
>>>            - const: ti,k3-j721sX-wave521c
>>>        - const: cnm,wave521c
>>> Providing a fallback and adding a enum which can be extended later on.
>> This looks almost good. I wonder what is "j721sX" - Google does not find
>> it. There is thouhg j721se.
> Well that was a misunderstanding from my side I thought that both j721se
> and j721s2 have the Wave5 IP block and wanted to describe both with
> j721sX. But as it turns out the IP block isn't present on j721se.

It does not matter. You must not have wildcards in compatibles.

> Additionally, I was only able to test the codec on j721s2 for now and so
> I would opt for calling it: `ti,k3-j721s2-wave521c`

Best regards,

Powered by blists - more mailing lists