linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] dt-bindings: hwmon: pwm-fan: add retain-state-shutdown property

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: <CAC5umyhrNCA4BHqC_k_tSaSOANcvP_vt485650xtFTPwJ+6snQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2024 00:34:02 +0900
From: Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@...il.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org, 
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.com>, 
	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, 
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, 
	Billy Tsai <billy_tsai@...eedtech.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] dt-bindings: hwmon: pwm-fan: add
 retain-state-shutdown property

2024年10月31日(木) 0:18 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>:
>
> On 28/10/2024 15:57, Akinobu Mita wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> You described the desired Linux feature or behavior, not the actual
> >>>> hardware. The bindings are about the latter, so instead you need to
> >>>> rephrase the property and its description to match actual hardware
> >>>> capabilities/features/configuration etc.
> >>>
> >>> Is this description okay?
> >>> (Reused the description of retain-state-shutdown in leds-gpio.yaml)
> >>>
> >>> description:
> >>>   Retain the state of the PWM on shutdown. Useful in BMC systems, for
> >>>   example, when the BMC is rebooted while the host remains up, the fan
> >>>   will not stop.
> >>
> >> Nothing improved in the property. You still say what the system should
> >> do. This is user-space choice, not DT.
> >
> > It seems better to implement it as a device attribute.
>
> I don't know about that. To repeat: if you say what system is supposed
> to be doing, it is a policy. Describe the hardware and its configuration
> and maybe this would be suitable for DT.

Billy, could you please write a proper description for this property?
I'm not the right person for this.