linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/6] dt-bindings: display: mediatek: Fix clocks count constraint for new SoCs

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: <7a1315ef-4be5-4528-858b-9f07c814636d@collabora.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2024 11:38:21 +0200
From: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>
To: Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>, Macpaul Lin <macpaul.lin@...iatek.com>
Cc: moudy.ho@...iatek.com, macross.chen@...iatek.com,
 Chun-Kuang Hu <chunkuang.hu@...nel.org>,
 Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
 Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
 Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
 David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, Simona Vetter <simona@...ll.ch>,
 Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Yong Wu <yong.wu@...iatek.com>,
 Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
 Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
 Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
 linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, iommu@...ts.linux.dev,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 Alexandre Mergnat <amergnat@...libre.com>, Bear Wang
 <bear.wang@...iatek.com>, Pablo Sun <pablo.sun@...iatek.com>,
 Macpaul Lin <macpaul@...il.com>, Sen Chu <sen.chu@...iatek.com>,
 Chris-qj chen <chris-qj.chen@...iatek.com>,
 MediaTek Chromebook Upstream
 <Project_Global_Chrome_Upstream_Group@...iatek.com>,
 Chen-Yu Tsai <wenst@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] dt-bindings: display: mediatek: Fix clocks count
 constraint for new SoCs

Il 25/09/24 16:34, Conor Dooley ha scritto:
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 04:42:59PM +0800, Macpaul Lin wrote:
>>
>> On 9/25/24 00:00, Conor Dooley wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 24, 2024 at 01:42:01PM +0200, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
>>>> Il 24/09/24 12:31, Macpaul Lin ha scritto:
>>>>> The display node in mt8195.dtsi was triggering a CHECK_DTBS error due
>>>>> to an excessively long 'clocks' property:
>>>>>      display@...06000: clocks: [[31, 14], [31, 43], [31, 44]] is too long
>>>>>
>>>>> To resolve this issue, add "maxItems: 3" to the 'clocks' property in
>>>>> the DT schema.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fixes: 4ed545e7d100 ("dt-bindings: display: mediatek: disp: split each block to individual yaml")
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Macpaul Lin <macpaul.lin@...iatek.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>     .../devicetree/bindings/display/mediatek/mediatek,split.yaml     | 1 +
>>>>>     1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/mediatek/mediatek,split.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/mediatek/mediatek,split.yaml
>>>>> index e4affc854f3d..42d2d483cc29 100644
>>>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/mediatek/mediatek,split.yaml
>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/mediatek/mediatek,split.yaml
>>>>> @@ -57,6 +57,7 @@ properties:
>>>>>       clocks:
>>>>>         items:
>>>>>           - description: SPLIT Clock
>>>>
>>>> That's at least confusing (granted that it works) - either add a description for
>>>> each clock and then set `minItems: 1` (preferred), or remove this "SPLIT Clock"
>>>> description and allow a maximum of 3 clocks.
>>>>
>>>> Removing the description can be done - IMO - because "SPLIT Clock" is, well,
>>>> saying that the SPLIT block gets a SPLIT clock ... stating the obvious, anyway.
>>>
>>> Right, but what are the other two new clocks? Are they as obvious?
>>> There's no clock-names here to give any more information as to what the
>>> other clocks are supposed to be.
>>>
>>> Kinda unrelated, but I think that "SPLIT Clock" probably isn't what the
>>> name of the clock in the IP block is anyway, sounds more like the name
>>> for it on the provider end..
>>
>> Thanks for the suggestions. I think Moudy could help on the new fixes
>> for both DT schem and mt8195.dtsi. This patch could be separated from
>> origin patch set.
> 
> Not sure what you mean about separating it, if you mean correcting the
> description for the split clock sure. The other stuff I mentioned needs
> to be resolved before I'm willing to ack this.

He means separating this patch from the rest of the series that he pushed - which
is okay, as it's a bit mixed anyway :-)

Besides ... Moudy, can you please help to clarify the description of those clocks?

Cheers,
Angelo