linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: mmc: renesas,sdhi: add top-level constraints

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: <CAMuHMdU3V=ZO6me5LekUQN4NC82yw5_UYNd23gZwctUa-GiJ6g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2024 15:38:48 +0200
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
Cc: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, 
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, 
	Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>, Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>, 
	linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: mmc: renesas,sdhi: add top-level constraints

Hi Krzysztof,

On Sun, Aug 18, 2024 at 7:29 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org> wrote:
> Properties with variable number of items per each device are expected to
> have widest constraints in top-level "properties:" block and further
> customized (narrowed) in "if:then:".  Add missing top-level constraints
> for clocks.
>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>

Thanks for your patch!

> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/renesas,sdhi.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/renesas,sdhi.yaml
> @@ -77,9 +77,13 @@ properties:
>      minItems: 1
>      maxItems: 3
>
> -  clocks: true
> +  clocks:
> +    minItems: 1
> +    maxItems: 4
>
> -  clock-names: true
> +  clock-names:
> +    minItems: 1
> +    maxItems: 4
>
>    dmas:
>      minItems: 4

I am a bit puzzled by all these add-top-level-constraint patches.
E.g. this file already constrains all of them below.

To me, it feels the same as a patch for driver code that would do:

    +   if (param < 16 || param > 512)
    +           return -EINVAL;
    +
        if (hw_variant_a) {
                if (param < 16 || param > 256)
                        return -EINVAL;
                ...
        } else if (hw_variant_b) {
                if (param < 32 || param > 512)
                        return -EINVAL;
                ...
        } else /* hw_variant_c */ {
                if (param < 32 || param > 384)
                        return -EINVAL;
                ...
        }

What's the point?
Thanks!

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds