linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] dt-bindings: soc: ti: Add AM65 peripheral virtualization unit

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: <e6eb9db0-baf4-439c-86c1-de4a9f09e2b6@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2024 12:35:42 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>
Cc: Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>, Santosh Shilimkar <ssantosh@...nel.org>,
 Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 Siddharth Vadapalli <s-vadapalli@...com>,
 Bao Cheng Su <baocheng.su@...mens.com>, Hua Qian Li
 <huaqian.li@...mens.com>, Diogo Ivo <diogo.ivo@...mens.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] dt-bindings: soc: ti: Add AM65 peripheral
 virtualization unit

On 27/08/2024 11:29, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>> +  reg:
>>> +    minItems: 2
>>
>> maxItems instead.
> 
> Can change, but maybe use the chance to explain to me why "maxItems" and
> why also "instead".

because minItems is not constrained. maxItem is and, in case of lack of
minItems, it implies minItems.

> 
>>
>>> +
>>> +  reg-names:
>>> +    items:
>>> +      - const: cfg
>>> +      - const: tlbif
>>> +
>>> +  interrupts:
>>> +    items:
>>> +      - description: fault interrupt
>>> +
>>> +  interrupt-names:
>>> +    items:
>>> +      - const: pvu
>>> +
>>> +required:
>>> +  - compatible
>>> +  - reg
>>> +  - interrupts
>>> +  - interrupt-names
>>> +
>>> +additionalProperties: false
>>> +
>>> +examples:
>>> +  - |
>>> +    ti-pvu@...80000 {
>>
>> Node names should be generic. See also an explanation and list of
>> examples (not exhaustive) in DT specification:
>> https://devicetree-specification.readthedocs.io/en/latest/chapter2-devicetree-basics.html#generic-names-recommendation
>>
>> for sure "ti" is not generic. pvu is the device name.
> 
> No problem - which one do you propose for this type of device?

iommu, but if this is not suitable, at pvu could stay. Just the first
'ti-' does not sound right in that case.

Best regards,
Krzysztof