linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] dt-bindings: media: Add bindings for raspberrypi,rp1-cfe

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, 19 Mar 2024 13:05:59 +0000
From: Naushir Patuck <naush@...pberrypi.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
Cc: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@...asonboard.com>, linux-media@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-rpi-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, 
	Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>, 
	Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>, Jacopo Mondi <jacopo.mondi@...asonboard.com>, 
	Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham@...asonboard.com>, 
	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>, 
	Raspberry Pi Kernel Maintenance <kernel-list@...pberrypi.com>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, 
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, 
	Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>, 
	Broadcom internal kernel review list <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] dt-bindings: media: Add bindings for raspberrypi,rp1-cfe

On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 at 13:02, Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> On 19/03/2024 13:57, Naushir Patuck wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> See writing bindings. Compatibles should be SoC specific. In some cases
> >>>> generic fallbacks make sense, in some note. But don't just choose
> >>>> "generic fallback" because you want. Provide rationale.
> >>>
> >>> If the compatible is SoC specific, I suppose "raspberrypi,rp1-cfe"
> >>> would be the correct string.
> >>
> >> Sure, but then please think what if rp1 is on Rpi6, called exactly the
> >> same (rp1), with some minor differences? Could it be?
> >
> > Yes, this is definitely possible.  In such cases, I would expect the
> > hardware to have a version register that would be queried by the
> > driver to adjust for minor differences, and the compatible string
> > remains the same.  Does that seem reasonable?
>
> The "would expect" is concerning. The register(s) must be there already,
> with proper value.
>

A version register already exists in the current hardware, so we will
update it to identify future hardware revisions.

Regards,
Naush