linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 14/15] dt-bindings: auxdisplay: Add Maxim MAX6958/6959

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: <Zc3yrdAdQ7-SRs1C@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2024 13:17:01 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc: devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	Robin van der Gracht <robin@...tonic.nl>,
	Paul Burton <paulburton@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 14/15] dt-bindings: auxdisplay: Add Maxim MAX6958/6959

On Thu, Feb 15, 2024 at 11:57:53AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 6:16 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 07:14:53PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

..

> > +description:
> > +  The Maxim MAX6958/6959 7-segment LED display controller provides
> > +  an I2C interface to up to four 7-segment LED digits. The MAX6959
> > +  in comparison to MAX6958 has the debounce and interrupt support.
> 
> IUIC, the primary differentiating factor is that the MAX6959 adds input
> and GPIO support?  Debounce and interrupt support are merely features
> of input support.

What should I do here? Rephrase?

> > +  Type of the chip can be autodetected via specific register read,
> > +  and hence the features may be enabled in the driver at run-time.
> 
> I don't think you need to read that register, as the users of the
> features (keypad mapping, interrupts property, ...) also need to be
> described in DTS (once supported).

So, the idea that if DT describes those we will check the chip ID and
instantiate what is asked?

> > +  Given hardware is simple and does not provide any additional pins,
> > +  such as reset or enable.
> 
> Does this matter? I.e. is it important to say this in the bindings?

>From Krzysztof's review of v1 I understood that it is important to say so
people wouldn't wonder if HW has support of that which is not implemented
(yet) or simply has no such pins.

Personally I would lean towards leaving this in the description.

..

Can you propose the full description text how you see it?

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko