linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] dt-bindings: spi: add spi-rx-bus-channels peripheral property

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: Mon, 8 Jan 2024 16:39:43 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	Michael Hennerich <michael.hennerich@...log.com>,
	Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@...log.com>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] dt-bindings: spi: add spi-rx-bus-channels
 peripheral property

On Sun, Jan 07, 2024 at 05:02:56PM -0600, David Lechner wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 7, 2024 at 3:27 PM Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:

> > This makes no sense to me without a corresponding change in the SPI core
> > and possibly controller support, though I guess you could do data
> > manging to rewrite from a normal parallel SPI to this for a pure
> > software implementation.  I also see nothing in the driver that even
> > attempts to parse this so I can't see how it could possibly work.

> We currently don't have a controller that supports this. This is just
> an attempt to make a complete binding for a peripheral according to
> [2] which says:

...

> So, will DT maintainers accept an incomplete binding for the
> peripheral? Or will you reconsider this without SPI core support if I
> can explain it better? It doesn't seem like a reasonable request to
> expect us to spend time developing software that we don't need at this
> time just to get a complete DT binding accepted for a feature that
> isn't being used.

I don't think it's sensible to try to make a binding for this without
having actually tried to put a system together that uses it and made
sure that everything is joined up properly, the thing about complete
bindings is more for things that are handle turning than for things that
are substantial new features in subsystems.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)