linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] dt-bindings: iio: adc: sophgo,cv18xx-saradc.yaml: Add Sophgo SARADC binding documentation

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: <20240708083011.058d0c57@xps-13>
Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2024 08:30:11 +0200
From: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
To: Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
Cc: Thomas Bonnefille <thomas.bonnefille@...tlin.com>, Jonathan Cameron
 <jic23@...nel.org>, Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>, Rob Herring
 <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
 <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Chen Wang <unicorn_wang@...look.com>, Inochi Amaoto
 <inochiama@...look.com>, Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>, Palmer
 Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>, Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>, Thomas
 Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] dt-bindings: iio: adc:
 sophgo,cv18xx-saradc.yaml: Add Sophgo SARADC binding documentation

Hi Conor,

> > > > +properties:
> > > > +  compatible:
> > > > +    oneOf:
> > > > +      - items:
> > > > +          - enum:
> > > > +              - sophgo,cv1800b-saradc
> > > > +          - const: sophgo,cv18xx-saradc  
> > > 
> > > I don't think the fallback here makes sense. If there's other devices
> > > with a compatible programming model added later, we can fall back to the
> > > cv1800b.

I'm sorry but isn't this slightly disagreeing with the "writing
bindings" doc pointed in v1? It says,

* DO use fallback compatibles when devices are the same as or a subset
  of prior implementations.

I believe we fall in the "devices are the same" category, so I would
have myself wrote a similar binding here with a compatible matching
them all, plus a hardware-implementation-specific compatible as well;
just in case.

Thanks,
Miquèl