linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] dt-bindings: rtc: armada-380-rtc: convert to dtschema

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: <20240325160231.GB4035876-robh@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2024 11:02:31 -0500
From: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To: Javier Carrasco <javier.carrasco.cruz@...il.com>
Cc: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	Baruch Siach <baruch@...s.co.il>, linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] dt-bindings: rtc: armada-380-rtc: convert to dtschema

On Sun, Mar 24, 2024 at 01:02:31AM +0100, Javier Carrasco wrote:
> On 3/24/24 00:37, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> > On 23/03/2024 23:46:13+0100, Javier Carrasco wrote:
> >> Convert existing binding to dtschema to support validation.
> >>
> >> +required:
> >> +  - compatible
> >> +  - reg
> >> +  - reg-names
> >> +  - interrupts
> >> +
> >> +additionalProperties: false
> > 
> > This is not correct because at least start-year is supported. Please
> > check for all your other submissions too.
> > 
> 
> allOf:
>   - $ref: rtc.yaml#
> 
> is missing, and then
> 
> unvealuatedProperties: false
> 
> to account for that.
> 
> "start-year" is read in the RTC base class, so I wonder why so many RTC
> bindings add a reference to rtc.yaml, but then use
> 
> additionalProperties: false

They may have pre-dated support for 'unevaluatedProperties', or you can 
list out which properties are used from a referenced schema which 
disallows unlisted properties. There's no hard rule here. Either way is 
fine.

Other than this and my 1 other comment, this series looks fine to me.

Rob