linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <457e336e-004c-4721-b58d-e9ada16dc04b@linaro.org>
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2023 08:17:28 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: Tengfei Fan <quic_tengfan@...cinc.com>, 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 v3 1/1] arm64: dts: qcom: sm8550: remove
 address/size-cells from mdss_dsi1

On 19/12/2023 01:31, Tengfei Fan wrote:
> The address/size-cells in mdss_dsi1 node have not ranges and child also
> have not reg, then this leads to dtc W=1 warnings:

I cannot parse it. Address/size cells never have ranges or children.
They cannot have. These are uint32 properties.

> 
>   sm8550.dtsi:2937.27-2992.6: Warning (avoid_unnecessary_addr_size): /soc@...isplay-subsystem@...0000/dsi@...6000:
>     unnecessary #address-cells/#size-cells without "ranges" or child "reg" property
> 
> 
> Reviewed-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Tengfei Fan <quic_tengfan@...cinc.com>
> ---

I disagreed with the patch before. You resubmit it without really
addressing my concerns.

I am not sure if this is correct fix and I want to fix all of such
errors (there are multiple of them) in the same way. Feel free to
propose common solution based on arguments.

I don't really want to NAKit but since you are resending without
finishing the discussion, which is quite impolite, then let's be like that:

NAK

Best regards,
Krzysztof