linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] dt-bindings: iio: imu: smi240: add Bosch smi240

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: <6hfic3qxdus2x5d24yi2kfj6s6bqaxif6b65gb2nm6bsuge2gc@6nfnmnpj3dqf>
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2024 08:32:51 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Jianping.Shen@...bosch.com
Cc: jic23@...nel.org, lars@...afoo.de, robh@...nel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org, 
	conor+dt@...nel.org, dima.fedrau@...il.com, marcelo.schmitt1@...il.com, 
	linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	Christian.Lorenz3@...bosch.com, Ulrike.Frauendorf@...bosch.com, Kai.Dolde@...bosch.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] dt-bindings: iio: imu: smi240: add Bosch smi240

On Wed, Sep 04, 2024 at 04:05:05PM +0200, Jianping.Shen@...bosch.com wrote:
> From: Shen Jianping <Jianping.Shen@...bosch.com>
> 
> Add devicetree binding for Bosch imu smi240.
> The smi240 is a combined three axis angular rate and
> three axis acceleration sensor module.
> 
> * The smi240 requires VDD and VDDIO
> * Provides only spi interface.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
> Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>
> Signed-off-by: Shen Jianping <Jianping.Shen@...bosch.com>
> ---
>  .../bindings/iio/imu/bosch,smi240.yaml        | 52 +++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 52 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/iio/imu/bosch,smi240.yaml
>

Please run scripts/checkpatch.pl and fix reported warnings. Then please
run  and (probably) fix more warnings.
Some warnings can be ignored, especially from --strict run, but the code
here looks like it needs a fix. Feel free to get in touch if the warning
is not clear.

Best regards,
Krzysztof