linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: watchdog: mediatek,mtk-wdt: add MT7988 watchdog and toprgu

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:   Fri, 10 Nov 2023 21:21:10 +0100
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Daniel Golle <daniel@...rotopia.org>
Cc:     AngeloGioacchino Del Regno 
        <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
        Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
        Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
        linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: watchdog: mediatek,mtk-wdt: add MT7988
 watchdog and toprgu

On 10/11/2023 21:18, Daniel Golle wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 08:58:57PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> I am repeating myself... but I don't know how to put it other way. I did
>> not ask you to rewrite your driver. I asked to drop the change to
>> bindings, because it is entirely pointless.
>>
>> Drop this change, only this. No need to rewrite drivers, they stay the same.
> 
> Dropping this change (I'm assuming you are referring to the hunk adding
> include/dt-bindings/reset/mt7988-resets.h) and also not adding that
> header file using a seperate commit means that there won't be a header
> defining the reset names.
> 
> The result would be having to numerically reference the specific
> resets in the device tree.

Which is a problem because? Do you see bindings for IO space? For
interrupts? For hundreds of other values? No, because the value is not a
binding.

DT binding binds the driver and DTS. If you have nothing in the driver,
there is no binding.

> 
> This is, of course, possible, but I don't understand what the advantage
> would be.

I pinged you three times on email I expect answer and there is nothing.
You ignored the thread completely.

I am finishing with this thread till you start answering emails.

Best regards,
Krzysztof