linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] dt-bindings: thermal: sophgo,cv1800-thermal: Add Sophgo CV1800 thermal

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:
 <SEYPR01MB42214130E7A922314CF44C3BD7A32@SEYPR01MB4221.apcprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2024 05:30:41 +0000
From: Haylen Chu <heylenay@...look.com>
To: Inochi Amaoto <inochiama@...look.com>,
	Chen Wang <unicorn_wang@...look.com>,
	Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
	Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>, Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>,
	Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
	Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
	Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@...nel.org>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] dt-bindings: thermal: sophgo,cv1800-thermal: Add
 Sophgo CV1800 thermal

On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 10:27:35AM +0800, Inochi Amaoto wrote:
> > And allow me clarify, what I said "a compatible that matches an actual SoC
> > and use it everywhere" means to define "sophgo,cv1800-thermal" just as
> > Haylen did and use it for all cv18xx SoC chips.
> > 
> 
> I know it. But there may be something like the pinctrl. They share the same
> logic, but have different data and layout. In fact, I am sure the thermal 
> is not suitable for this case.

But for the thermal sensor, they are exactly the same, I don't think
it's worth to add compatible strings for each SoC. Even though later
SoCs do come with a different design, we could add a new one with
little pain.

Best regards,
Haylen

> > Anyway, as Conor suggested, we'd better not use wildcards (char 'x') in
> > compatibles.
> > 
> 
> Yeah, I agree.
> 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Chen
> > 
> > > > Or we can add ones for each SoC and have a fallback to cv1800.
> > > SoC specific compatible means most of the SoC have different part
> > > for this peripheral. For safety, it may not use the fallback
> > > generic compatible.
> > > 
> > > Regards,
> > > Inochi