linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: usb: mt6360-tcpc: Drop interrupt-names

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: <20240123-procurer-jumbo-ebbec485505d@spud>
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2024 17:14:32 +0000
From: Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
To: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>
Cc: chunfeng.yun@...iatek.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
	robh+dt@...nel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org,
	conor+dt@...nel.org, matthias.bgg@...il.com, linux@...ck-us.net,
	heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com, cy_huang@...htek.com,
	linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: usb: mt6360-tcpc: Drop
 interrupt-names

On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 11:32:30AM +0100, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
> Il 19/01/24 17:32, Conor Dooley ha scritto:
> > On Fri, Jan 19, 2024 at 10:41:04AM +0100, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
> > > This IP has only one interrupt, hence interrupt-names is not necessary
> > > to have.
> > > Since there is no user yet, simply remove interrupt-names.
> > 
> > I'm a bit confused chief. Patch 2 in this series removes a user of this
> > property from a driver, so can you explain how this statement is true?
> > 
> > Maybe I need to drink a few cans of Monster and revisit this patchset?
> > 
> 
> What I mean with "there is no user" is that there's no device tree with any
> mt6360-tcpc node upstream yet, so there is no meaningful ABI breakage.
> Different story would be if there was a device tree using this already, in
> which case, you can make a required property optional but not remove it.

Not every devicetree lives within the kernel.. If the driver is using
it, I'm not inclined to agree that it should be removed.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)