linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: pinctrl: qcom,pmic-mpp: clean up example

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, 1 Dec 2023 13:51:06 -0600
From:   Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To:     Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
Cc:     Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@...nel.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: pinctrl: qcom,pmic-mpp: clean up example

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 10:56 AM Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 01, 2023 at 08:43:20AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 06:28:34PM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > > The Multi-Purpose Pin controller block is part of an SPMI PMIC (which in
> > > turns sits on an SPMI bus) and uses a single value for the register
> > > property that corresponds to its base address.
> > >
> > > Clean up the example by adding a parent PMIC node with proper
> > > '#address-cells' and '#size-cells' properties, dropping the incorrect
> > > second register value, adding some newline separators and increasing the
> > > indentation to four spaces.
> >
> > This is fine, but I prefer these MFDs have 1 complete example rather
> > than piecemeal examples for each child device.
>
> Yeah, this is not ideal. The closest thing we've got are the examples
> in:
>
>         Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/qcom,spmi-pmic.yaml
>
> Are you suggesting eventually dropping the examples from the child node
> bindings and adding (several) complete examples in the parent one?

Yes, but if the child nodes are truly reused across multiple PMICs
then, it is probably a worthwhile exception. There's not a great deal
of reuse on most MFDs.

> I guess there would need to be more than one if you want to cover all
> the various child nodes with real examples.

We don't want examples to be exhaustive permutations of every
possibility either.

Rob