linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] dt-bindings: arm: qcom: Document rb5gen2 board

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: Thu, 14 Mar 2024 08:01:25 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: Caleb Connolly <caleb.connolly@...aro.org>,
 Wasim Nazir <quic_wasimn@...cinc.com>, Bjorn Andersson
 <andersson@...nel.org>, Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
 Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel@...cinc.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] dt-bindings: arm: qcom: Document rb5gen2 board

On 14/03/2024 05:15, Caleb Connolly wrote:
> 
> 
> On 13/03/2024 07:12, Wasim Nazir wrote:
>> Document board bindings for Rb5gen2.
>> Rb5gen2 is using Rb5 gen2 SOM which is based on QCS8550 SoC.
>> RB5gen2 is development kit used for IOT solutions.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Wasim Nazir <quic_wasimn@...cinc.com>
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
>> index 8115088a6076..de6139db8ef6 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/qcom.yaml
>> @@ -1013,6 +1013,13 @@ properties:
>>            - const: qcom,qcs8550
>>            - const: qcom,sm8550
>>
>> +      - items:
>> +          - enum:
>> +              - qcom,qcs8550-rb5gen2
>> +          - const: qcom,qcs8550-rb5gen2-som
> Is this a Thundercomm SoM like the other RBx boards? If so, shouldn't it
> be "thundercomm,c8550-som" (Or "qcom,c8550-som")?

If this is the same product, then yes. It's clearly not Qualcomm:
https://www.thundercomm.com/product/c8550-som/

If not, can you point us to any resources on this?

Eh, let me un-review it.

Best regards,
Krzysztof