linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 09/14] dt-bindings: fsi: Document the FSI Hub Controller

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: <7c475cf3-1f76-4be9-8461-946293bb4f15@kernel.org>
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2024 18:43:04 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Eddie James <eajames@...ux.ibm.com>, linux-aspeed@...ts.ozlabs.org
Cc: devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-fsi@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, lakshmiy@...ibm.com, robh@...nel.org,
 krzk+dt@...nel.org, conor+dt@...nel.org, joel@....id.au,
 andrew@...econstruct.com.au
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 09/14] dt-bindings: fsi: Document the FSI Hub
 Controller

On 26/04/2024 17:19, Eddie James wrote:
>>
>>> +  The FSI Hub Controller is an FSI controller, providing a number of FSI links,
>>> +  located on a CFAM. Therefore this node will always be a child of an FSI CFAM
>>> +  node.
>>> +
>>> +properties:
>>> +  compatible:
>>> +    enum:
>>> +      - ibm,hub-fsi-controller
>> Again, is it for specific chip? SoC? Aren't you using generic
>> compatibles (not allowed)?
> 
> 
> This one is fairly universally supported on FSI (any POWER chip will 
> have it) so I didn't add a specific chip... Should i? Do you mean 
> generic compatibles are not allowed? How generic do you mean?

Maybe IBM is different here, but for every regular SoC the blocks of
that SoC should carry SoC model name/number.

Best regards,
Krzysztof