linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 6/7] ASoC: dt-bindings: xmos,xvf3500: add XMOS XVF3500 voice processor

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, 6 Feb 2024 15:49:35 +0000
From: Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Javier Carrasco <javier.carrasco@...fvision.net>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	linux-sound@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/7] ASoC: dt-bindings: xmos,xvf3500: add XMOS XVF3500
 voice processor

On Tue, Feb 06, 2024 at 03:35:44PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 06, 2024 at 04:05:15PM +0100, Javier Carrasco wrote:
> 
> > The names in the datasheet are vdd for the 1V0 supply and vddio for the
> > 3V3 supply. I named the latter vdd2 instead because this device does not
> > have its own driver and instead it uses the onboard_usb_hub generic
> > driver, where the supplies are named vdd and vdd2.
> 
> > Those are the names used for devm_regulator_bulk_get(). Is that not the
> > right way to match them?
> 
> The binding should really use vddio instead of vdd2 but if that's an
> existing binding then it gets more annoying, probably that existing
> binding is wrong too since vddio does sound like an entirely plausible
> standard name for a 3.3V supply. :/  At the very least the binding
> should document the weird mapping, though ideally the driver would be
> tought to request names matching the datasheet if the compatible is the
> one for this device.  Doing the better naming might be too much hassle
> though.

Initially the driver targeted a device with a single supply, the name
'vdd' was kept generic since it was expected that other devices would be
supported (except for a couple of minor bits the driver is not device
specific). Later support for a device with two supplies was added, with
the generic name 'vdd2' to support other devices with multiple regulators.

Using the correct naming would be doable, with the caveat that the old
naming still needs to be supported for backwards compatibility.