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: <8546f599-f480-403f-9da4-a227dbd5a6cf@linaro.org>
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2023 11:13:46 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: "Aiqun Yu (Maria)" <quic_aiquny@...cinc.com>,
 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 11:09, Aiqun Yu (Maria) wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>     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.
>>> Per my understanding, "qcom,mdss-dsi-ctrl" driver node like "mdss_dsi1"
>>> don't need to have address/size-cells properties.
>>
>> Just because dtc says so? And what about bindings?
> I don't find any reason why "qcom,mdss-dsi-ctrl" driver node need to 
> have address/size-cells properties. Document Bindings should also be fixed.

Hm, maybe we misunderstand each other but I found clear reason:
referencing common binding which mentions panels. Now, that's the reason
for DTS but of course maybe hardware is different. I did not investigate
that.

>>
>>> Feel free to let us know whether there is different idea of
>>> "address/size-cells" needed for the "qcom,mdss-dsi-ctrl" driver node.
>>
>> The bindings expressed that idea. If the binding is incorrect, fix the
>> binding and the DTS. If the binding is correct, provide rationale why it
>> somehow does not apply here etc.
> Our plan is to fix the bindings as well.
> 
> In case you have missed the question, I just re-place it here:
> While there are about 22 different soc dtsi and it's document binding 
> files needed to be fixed. Shall we fix it for all qcom related soc usage 
> in one patch, or we'd better to split into different patches according 
> to soc specifically?

Both options work for me.

Best regards,
Krzysztof