linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] dt-bindings: regulator: twl-regulator: convert to yaml

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, 28 May 2024 13:25:29 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@...nade.info>
Cc: lee@...nel.org, robh@...nel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
 lgirdwood@...il.com, broonie@...nel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] dt-bindings: regulator: twl-regulator: convert to
 yaml

On 28/05/2024 13:16, Andreas Kemnade wrote:
> On Tue, 28 May 2024 12:04:22 +0200
> Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org> wrote:
> 
>> On 28/05/2024 08:57, Andreas Kemnade wrote:
>>> Convert the regulator bindings to yaml files. To allow only the regulator
>>> compatible corresponding to the toplevel mfd compatible, split the file
>>> into one per device.
>>>
>>> To not need to allow any subnode name, specify clearly node names
>>> for all the regulators.
>>>
>>> Drop one twl5030 compatible due to no documentation on mfd side and no
>>> users of the twl5030.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@...nade.info>
>>> ---
>>> Reason for being RFC:
>>> the integration into ti,twl.yaml seems not to work as expected
>>> make dt_binding_check crashes without any clear error message
>>> if used on the ti,twl.yaml
>>>
>>>  .../devicetree/bindings/mfd/ti,twl.yaml       |   4 +-
>>>  .../regulator/ti,twl4030-regulator.yaml       | 402 ++++++++++++++++++
>>>  .../regulator/ti,twl6030-regulator.yaml       | 292 +++++++++++++
>>>  .../regulator/ti,twl6032-regulator.yaml       | 238 +++++++++++
>>>  .../bindings/regulator/twl-regulator.txt      |  80 ----
>>>  5 files changed, 935 insertions(+), 81 deletions(-)
>>>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/ti,twl4030-regulator.yaml
>>>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/ti,twl6030-regulator.yaml
>>>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/ti,twl6032-regulator.yaml
>>>  delete mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/twl-regulator.txt
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/ti,twl.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/ti,twl.yaml
>>> index c2357fecb56cc..4ced6e471d338 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/ti,twl.yaml
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/ti,twl.yaml
>>> @@ -50,7 +50,7 @@ allOf:
>>>            properties:
>>>              compatible:
>>>                const: ti,twl4030-wdt
>>> -
>>> +        $ref: /schemas/regulator/ti,twl4030-regulator.yaml  
>>
>> That's not needed, just like othehr refs below.
>>
> but how to prevent error messages like this:
> 
> arch/arm/boot/dts/ti/omap/omap2430-sdp.dtb: twl@48: Unevaluated properties are not allowed ('gpio', 'keypad', 'pwm', 'pwmled', 'regulator-vaux1', 'regulator-vaux2', 'regulator-vaux3', 'regulator-vaux4', 'regulator-vdac', 'regulator-vdd1', 'regulator-vintana1', 'regulator-vintana2', 'regulator-vintdig', 'regulator-vio', 'regulator-vmmc1', 'regulator-vmmc2', 'regulator-vpll1', 'regulator-vpll2', 'regulator-vsim', 'regulator-vusb1v5', 'regulator-vusb1v8', 'regulator-vusb3v1
> 
> esp. the regulator parts without adding stuff to ti,twl.yaml?

Eh? That's a watchdog, not regulator. Why do you add ref to regulator?

..

>>> +
>>> +  regulator-vaux2:
>>> +    type: object
>>> +    $ref: regulator.yaml#
>>> +    unevaluatedProperties: false
>>> +    properties:
>>> +      compatible:
>>> +        const: "ti,twl4030-vaux2"
>>> +
>>> +      regulator-initial-mode:
>>> +        items:
>>> +          - items:
>>> +              enum:
>>> +                - 0x08 # Sleep mode, the nominal output voltage is maintained
>>> +                       # with low power consumption with low load current capability
>>> +                - 0x0e # Active mode, the regulator can deliver its nominal output
>>> +                       # voltage with full-load current capability  
>>
>> These entries are the same. Just use patternProperties and enum for
>> compatible.
>>
> hmm, if I am using that, how do I prevent e.g. constructions like this to be
> valid?
> 
> regulator-vaux2 {
> 	compatible = "ti,twl4030-vaux1";
> };
> 

Why would node name matter if you have compatible? The entire point of
compatibles is to not to rely on node names.

Best regards,
Krzysztof