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  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, 21 Nov 2023 09:37:21 +0100
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <>
To:     Geert Uytterhoeven <>
Cc:     Michal Simek <>,
        Rob Herring <>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <>,
        Conor Dooley <>,
        Matthias Brugger <>,
        AngeloGioacchino Del Regno 
        <>,,,,, Andrew Davis <>,
        Arnd Bergmann <>,
        Bjorn Andersson <>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <>,
        Heiko Stuebner <>,
        Konrad Dybcio <>,
        Neil Armstrong <>,
        Nishanth Menon <>, Olof Johansson <>,,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] docs: dt-bindings: add DTS Coding Style document

On 21/11/2023 09:08, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>>>> I guess there are (many) other examples...
>>>> OK, I never had such in my hands. Anyway, the SoM which can run
>>>> standalone  has a meaning of a board, so how exactly you want to
>>>> rephrase the paragraph?
>>> What about?
>>> 2. If applicable: DTSI with common or re-usable parts of the hardware (e.g.
>>> entire System-on-Module). DTS if runs standalone.
>> OK, but then it's duplicating the option 3. It also suggests that SoM
>> should be a DTS, which is not what we want for such case. Such SoMs must
>> have DTSI+DTS.
> So you want us to have a one-line <SoM>.dts, which just includes <SoM>.dtsi?
> IMHO that adds more files for no much gain.

Yes, if this is a real SoM, then yes. There is much gain - it clearly
represents the hardware like we in general expect. It allows re-usage by
in- and out-tree users, while documenting this possibility.

We structure DTS according to main components of the hardware, which
serves as self-documenting, re-usable and easy to grasp solution.

> Users of a SoM can easily include <SoM>.dts.

Which is confusing during review and not a welcomed pattern.

> 'git grep "#include .*dts\>"' tells you we have plenty of users of that scheme.

Yeah, you can put C functions inside header (included only once). You
can include C file in other C file. But just because you can do it, it
does not mean you should do it. It's not the way we want to make code

Best regards,

Powered by blists - more mailing lists