linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/4] dt-bindings: net: dsa: realtek: describe LED usage

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, 21 Mar 2024 13:18:13 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Luiz Angelo Daros de Luca <luizluca@...il.com>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
 Alvin Šipraga <alsi@...g-olufsen.dk>,
 Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
 Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>, "David S. Miller"
 <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/4] dt-bindings: net: dsa: realtek: describe LED
 usage

On 21/03/2024 12:56, Luiz Angelo Daros de Luca wrote:
> 
>>
>>> +
>>> +            patternProperties:
>>> +              '^led@[a-f0-9]+$':
>>
>> [0-3]
> 
> leds are already defined for a port. I'm just trying to add a
> restriction to allow only 0-3 leds and use that to identify the group.

Where is the restriction, in your original patch?

> These suggestions will redefine the leds property, forcing me to

How? I really do not see it.

> declare #address-cells, #size-cells for leds and reference the led
> schema in led@[0-3]. Is there a way to just add a constraint to what
> is already present?

I don't follow.

> 
>>
>>> +                type: object
>>> +                additionalProperties: true
>>
>> This cannot be 'true'. Which then will point you to errors and missing
>> ref to leds schema and need to use unevaluatedProperties: false.
Best regards,
Krzysztof