linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] dt-bindings: omap-mcpdm: Convert to DT schema

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: <c9084453-65f1-43b0-88df-5b73052ccb72@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2024 19:08:36 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: Mithil <bavishimithil@...il.com>
Cc: Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
 Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] dt-bindings: omap-mcpdm: Convert to DT schema

On 05/04/2024 18:29, Mithil wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 5, 2024 at 9:27 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski
> <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 05/04/2024 16:48, Mithil wrote:
>>> So sorry about the 2nd patch being sent as a new mail, here is a new
>>> patch with the changes as suggested
>>>
>>>> Please use subject prefixes matching the subsystem
>>> Changed the patch name to match the folder history.
>>
>> Nothing improved. What the history tells you?
>>
> 
> Referred to "ASoC: dt-bindings: rt1015: Convert to dtschema"
> Not really sure what else I should change.

But the subject you wrote here is "dt-bindings: omap-mcpdm: Convert to
DT schema"?

Where is the ASoC?

> 
>>>
>>>> Is it your full name?
>>> Fixed it, my apologies.
>>>
>>>> Filename like compatible.
>>> Fixed.
>>
>> Still not, compatible is omap4.
>>
> 
> Sorry, seems like I was sending the old file again.
> Will fix this.
> 
>>>
>>>> Please open existing bindings and look how it is done there.
>>> Changed it, is it fine now?
>>
>> You mean v2? I have no clue to what you are responding here, but no, v2
>> did not improve much.
>>
> 
> Again, could you guide me to what needs to be done?
> Description for reg should be fine as this is how it is done in other
> files as well.

reg is not correct. Please point me to files doing that way, so I can
fix them.

You need items with description.

> Interrupts and hwmods use maxItems now.

hwmods lost description, why?

> Changed nodename to be generic in example as well.

"mcpdm" does not feel generic. What is mcpdm? Google finds nothing.
Maybe just "pdm"?

Anyway, this patch has exactly the same name as v1, so what did you
improve? Your v2 is almost the same as v1.


> Those were the suggested changes previously.

Best regards,
Krzysztof