linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC v3 5/9] dt-bindings: board: Document board-ids for Qualcomm devices

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: Wed, 29 May 2024 08:09:01 -0700
From: Elliot Berman <quic_eberman@...cinc.com>
To: Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
CC: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Conor Dooley
	<conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio
	<konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
        Amrit Anand <quic_amrianan@...cinc.com>,
        "Peter
 Griffin" <peter.griffin@...aro.org>,
        Caleb Connolly
	<caleb.connolly@...aro.org>,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>, Doug Anderson
	<dianders@...omium.org>,
        Simon Glass <sjg@...omium.org>, Chen-Yu Tsai
	<wenst@...omium.org>,
        Julius Werner <jwerner@...omium.org>,
        "Humphreys,
 Jonathan" <j-humphreys@...com>,
        Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@...aro.org>,
        "Jon
 Hunter" <jonathanh@...dia.org>,
        Michal Simek <michal.simek@....com>,
        <boot-architecture@...ts.linaro.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v3 5/9] dt-bindings: board: Document board-ids for
 Qualcomm devices

On Sat, May 25, 2024 at 06:08:46PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Tue, May 21, 2024 at 11:38:02AM -0700, Elliot Berman wrote:
> > +
> > +allOf:
> > +  # either describe soc or soc-version; it's confusing to have both
> 
> Why not just use the one that has the most information and discard the
> others? If your dtb picker for this platform doesn't care about the soc
> version, then just don't look at that cell?

The dtb picker for the platform doesn't know whether to care about the
SoC version/platform version/whatever. That's a property of the DTB
itself and I don't think it makes much sense to bake that into the DTB
picker which would otherwise be unaware of this.

> 
> Likewise for platform and PMIC, why can't you ignore the cells you don't
> care about, rather than having a new property for each variant? Nothing
> in this patch explains why multiple variants are required rather than
> just dealing with the most informational.
>

Sure, I will explain in future revision.

- Elliot