linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 1/8] dt-bindings: pinctrl: mediatek,mt6779-pinctrl: Pull pinctrl node changes from MT6795 document

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <7VO5MS.DLTH7ISEUBUE1@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2024 09:33:07 +0300
From: Yassine Oudjana <yassine.oudjana@...il.com>
To: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
	Sean Wang <sean.wang@...nel.org>, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>, Yassine Oudjana
	<y.oudjana@...tonmail.com>, Andy Teng <andy.teng@...iatek.com>,
	linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/8] dt-bindings: pinctrl: mediatek,mt6779-pinctrl:
 Pull pinctrl node changes from MT6795 document


On Mon, Oct 14 2024 at 14:02:37 -05:00:00, Rob Herring 
<robh@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 3:27 AM AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
> <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com> wrote:
>> 
>>  Il 11/10/24 18:56, Rob Herring ha scritto:
>>  > On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 03:03:46PM +0300, Yassine Oudjana wrote:
>>  >> From: Yassine Oudjana <y.oudjana@...tonmail.com>
>>  >>
>>  >> mediatek,pinctrl-mt6795.yaml has different node name patterns 
>> which match
>>  >> bindings of other MediaTek pin controllers, ref for 
>> pinmux-node.yaml which
>>  >> has a description of the pinmux property, as well as some 
>> additional
>>  >> descriptions for some pin configuration properties. Pull those 
>> changes
>>  >> into mediatek,mt6779-pinctrl.yaml and adjust the example DTS to 
>> match in
>>  >> preparation to combine the MT6795 document into it.
>>  >>
>>  >> Signed-off-by: Yassine Oudjana <y.oudjana@...tonmail.com>
>>  >> ---
>>  >>   .../pinctrl/mediatek,mt6779-pinctrl.yaml      | 38 
>> ++++++++++++++-----
>>  >>   1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>  >>
>>  >> diff --git 
>> a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/mediatek,mt6779-pinctrl.yaml 
>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/mediatek,mt6779-pinctrl.yaml
>>  >> index 3bbc00df5548d..352a88d7b135e 100644
>>  >> --- 
>> a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/mediatek,mt6779-pinctrl.yaml
>>  >> +++ 
>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pinctrl/mediatek,mt6779-pinctrl.yaml
>>  >> @@ -111,12 +111,12 @@ allOf:
>>  >>           - "#interrupt-cells"
>>  >>
>>  >>   patternProperties:
>>  >> -  '-[0-9]*$':
>>  >> +  '-pins$':
>>  >
>>  > Worst case, this could be an ABI break. Best case, it's churn for
>>  > mt6779. Is it worth unifying?
>>  >
>>  All those MediaTek pinctrl bindings are mostly the same, where only 
>> the pin
>>  definitions in the binding header does actually change.
>> 
>>  I think that it's worth unifying them, not only to get rid of the 
>> duplication
>>  but mostly for consistency between all of those subnode names which 
>> are wildly
>>  differing for no real reason... and consistency is a long time 
>> issue with
>>  MediaTek bindings/dts in general (which is way way way better now, 
>> but still)...
>> 
>>  Besides - just for context and nothing else: the driver doesn't 
>> care about
>>  the names of the subnodes, anyway... so while this is technically 
>> an ABI break
>>  it's not really creating any functionality issue, and then, 
>> actually, Yassine
>>  is also modifying the devicetrees to comply with his consistency 
>> changes, so,
>>  in my own perspective, it's still acceptable.
> 
> Wait, I thought there were no users?

Right, When I said there were no users I was thinking of MT6779 
strictly, but MT6797 is included in the bindings so it counts too. 
mt6797.dtsi is currently the only place where these bindings are used.

> 
> We generally only consider node names ABI when/if something or someone
> cares. Most of the time it doesn't matter. For the pinctrl nodes, it's
> really just a question of churn renaming a lot of nodes.
> 
> Ultimately, it's up to you. I only care that the implications of the
> changes are clear in the commit msg.

I'll mention MT6797 in the commit message.