linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 1/7] dt-bindings: mfd: add support for the NXP SIUL2 module

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: <ef10bfee-dfa1-4968-a99d-d7eaf958353c@oss.nxp.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2024 13:11:00 +0200
From: Andrei Stefanescu <andrei.stefanescu@....nxp.com>
To: Frank Li <Frank.li@....com>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
 Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
 <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Chester Lin <chester62515@...il.com>,
 Matthias Brugger <mbrugger@...e.com>,
 Ghennadi Procopciuc <Ghennadi.Procopciuc@....com>,
 Larisa Grigore <larisa.grigore@....com>,
 Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
 "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>,
 Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>, Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
 Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>, Dong Aisheng <aisheng.dong@....com>,
 Jacky Bai <ping.bai@....com>, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, NXP S32 Linux Team <s32@....com>,
 Christophe Lizzi <clizzi@...hat.com>, Alberto Ruiz <aruizrui@...hat.com>,
 Enric Balletbo <eballetb@...hat.com>,
 Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>, imx@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/7] dt-bindings: mfd: add support for the NXP SIUL2
 module

Hi Frank,

Thank you for your review!

>> +      - description: SIUL2_1 module memory
> 
> description have not provide more informaiton.
> maxItems: 2 should be enough here.
>

I will fix in v6.

>> +
>> +patternProperties:
>> +  '-hog(-[0-9]+)?$':
>> +    required:
>> +      - gpio-hog
>> +
>> +  '-pins$':
>> +    type: object
>> +    additionalProperties: false
>> +
>> +    patternProperties:
>> +      '-grp[0-9]$':
>> +        type: object
>> +        allOf:
>> +          - $ref: /schemas/pinctrl/pinmux-node.yaml#
>> +          - $ref: /schemas/pinctrl/pincfg-node.yaml#
>> +        description:
>> +          Pinctrl node's client devices specify pin muxes using subnodes,
>> +          which in turn use the standard properties below.
>> +
>> +        properties:
>> +          bias-disable: true
>> +          bias-high-impedance: true
>> +          bias-pull-up: true
>> +          bias-pull-down: true
>> +          drive-open-drain: true
>> +          input-enable: true
>> +          output-enable: true
> 
> suppose needn't such common property, if use
> 	unevaluatedProperties: false

This part was taken from pinctrl/nxp,s32g2-siul2-pinctrl.yaml and, if I remember
correctly, feedback from that patch's review was to explicitly specify which
properties are supported by this binding. Would it be ok to keep this section
as-is(with all of the supported properties and the additionalProperties: false)?

>> +
>> +          pinmux:
>> +            description: |
> 
> needn't "|" here
> 
>> +              An integer array for representing pinmux configurations of
>> +              a device. Each integer consists of a PIN_ID and a 4-bit
>> +              selected signal source(SSS) as IOMUX setting, which is
>> +              calculated as: pinmux = (PIN_ID << 4 | SSS)

I need it here because of the "pinmux = (PIN_ID << 4 | SSS)" part. 

>> +
>> +          slew-rate:
>> +            description: Supported slew rate based on Fmax values (MHz)
>> +            enum: [83, 133, 150, 166, 208]
>> +
>> +        additionalProperties: false
> 
> It should be unevaluatedProperties: false because there $ref.

Do you mean to change "additionalProperties:false" to "unevaluatedProperties:false"?
If I understand correctly "additionalProperties:false" only allows the explicitly mentioned
subset of properties from other schemas whereas "unevaluatedProperties:false" allows all
properties from other schemas. I would like to permit only the mentioned properties. Would
that be ok?

>> +  - |
>> +    #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/arm-gic.h>
>> +    #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/irq.h>
>> +
>> +    siul2: siul2@...9c000 {
> 
> needn't label siul2.

I will fix in v6.

>> +
>> +        jtag-grp1 {
>> +          pinmux = <0x11>;
>> +          slew-rate = <166>;
>> +        };
> 
> one example should be enough.

I will fix in v6.

Best regards,
Andrei