linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: fpga: Convert bridge binding to yaml

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: Tue, 9 Jan 2024 09:06:52 +0100
From: Michal Simek <michal.simek@....com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
 Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, monstr@...str.eu, michal.simek@...inx.com,
 git@...inx.com, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
 Moritz Fischer <mdf@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
 Tom Rix <trix@...hat.com>, Wu Hao <hao.wu@...el.com>,
 Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@...el.com>,
 "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS"
 <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, kishore Manne <nava.kishore.manne@....com>,
 "open list:FPGA MANAGER FRAMEWORK" <linux-fpga@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: fpga: Convert bridge binding to yaml



On 1/9/24 09:00, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 09/01/2024 04:53, Xu Yilun wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 10:16:17AM +0100, Michal Simek wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1/8/24 10:09, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>> On 05/01/2024 17:04, Michal Simek wrote:
>>>>> Convert the generic fpga bridge DT binding to json-schema.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@....com>
>>>>
>>>>> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/fpga/fpga-bridge.yaml#
>>>>> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
>>>>> +
>>>>> +title: FPGA Bridge
>>>>> +
>>>>> +maintainers:
>>>>> +  - Michal Simek <michal.simek@....com>
>>>>> +
>>>>> +properties:
>>>>> +  $nodename:
>>>>> +    pattern: "^fpga-bridge(@.*)?$"
>>>>
>>>> Not sure, but maybe we need to allow fpga-bridge-1? Could we have more
>>>> than one bridge on given system?
>>>
>>> Yilun: Any comment on this?
>>
>> We can have more bridges, but IIUC people use fpga-bridge@0, fpga-bridge@0
>> to identify them. So the expression is OK to me.
> 
> So you claim unit address thus reg with some sort of bus address is a
> requirement? Then "?" is not correct in that pattern.

I expect it is about that people are using fpga-bridge@0 but bridge is not on 
the bus. Yilun said that reg property in altr,socfpga-fpga2sdram-bridge.yaml is 
optional which means no reg property no @XXX in node name.
That's why I think that expression is correct. If there are more bridges without 
reg property then I expect we need to get more examples to align expression.

Thanks,
Michal