linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 6/7] dt-bindings: mfd: syscon: Split and enforce documenting MFD children

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: <3d54c64b-e1cd-4034-b0dd-e5d6607c3ef1@collabora.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2024 12:39:35 +0200
From: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
 Orson Zhai <orsonzhai@...il.com>, Baolin Wang
 <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>, Chunyan Zhang <zhang.lyra@...il.com>,
 Jacky Huang <ychuang3@...oton.com>, Shan-Chun Hung <schung@...oton.com>,
 Khuong Dinh <khuong@...amperecomputing.com>, Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>,
 Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Chuanhua Lei <lchuanhua@...linear.com>,
 Rahul Tanwar <rtanwar@...linear.com>,
 Lars Povlsen <lars.povlsen@...rochip.com>,
 Steen Hegelund <Steen.Hegelund@...rochip.com>,
 Daniel Machon <daniel.machon@...rochip.com>, UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com,
 Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>, Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>
Cc: Jiaxun Yang <jiaxun.yang@...goat.com>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, Conor Dooley
 <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>, Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 6/7] dt-bindings: mfd: syscon: Split and enforce
 documenting MFD children

Il 27/06/24 12:32, Krzysztof Kozlowski ha scritto:
> Simple syscon nodes can be documented in common syscon.yaml, however
> devices with simple-mfd compatible, thus with some children, should have
> their own schema listing these children.  Such listing makes the binding
> specific, allows better validation (so the incorrect child would not
> appear in the simple-mfd node) and actually enforces repeated rule for
> simple-mfd devices:
> 
>    "simple-mfd" is only for simple devices, where the children do not
>    depend on the parent.
> 
> Currently the syscon+simple-mfd binding is quite broad and allows
> any child or property, thus above rule cannot be enforced.
> 
> Split the syscon.yaml binding into:
> 1. Common syscon properties, used potentially by many bindings.
> 2. Simple syscon devices (NO simple-mfd!).
> 
> Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>
> Reviewed-by: Rob Herring (Arm) <robh@...nel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>

Reviewed-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>