linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/7] arm64: dts: qcom: sm8550: remove address/size-cells from mdss

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <28496d0b-87db-4bab-9853-2073d9ad4c8a@quicinc.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2023 08:40:30 +0800
From: Tengfei Fan <quic_tengfan@...cinc.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>, <agross@...nel.org>,
        <andersson@...nel.org>, <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
        <robh+dt@...nel.org>, <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        <conor+dt@...nel.org>
CC: <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <kernel@...cinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/7] arm64: dts: qcom: sm8550: remove
 address/size-cells from mdss_dsi1



在 12/18/2023 6:13 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski 写道:
> On 18/12/2023 10:59, Tengfei Fan wrote:
>>
>>
>> 在 12/11/2023 6:25 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski 写道:
>>> On 07/12/2023 10:27, Tengfei Fan wrote:
>>>> Address/size-cells will cause dtbs check warning, because mdss_dsi1 node
>>>> have not ranges and child also have not reg, so remove address/size-cells.
>>>
>>> Paste the excerpt of warning.
>> Sure, I will paste the excerpt of warning.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Tengfei Fan <quic_tengfan@...cinc.com>
>>>> ---
>>>
>>> I am not sure if this is correct. The address/size cells are there for
>>> panels. We have multiple of such warnings, so I would like to have here
>>> consensus for all of them.
>> Currently these address/size cells lead to dtc W=1 warning, so these
> 
> I know.
> 
>> should be dropped.
> 
> Why? They are correct.
> 
>> These can be re-added if needed at a later date.
> 
> Added where? These are rather properties of SoC.
> 
> This does not solve any of my concerns.
Hi Krzysztof,
Sorry, a new patch has been submitted to upstream before seeing your reply.
I will do more sync with internal teams, please ignore new patch series 
before we cannot solve your concerns.

> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
> 

-- 
Thx and BRs,
Tengfei Fan