linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] dt-bindings: arm: google: add gs101-raven and generic gs101-pixel

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: <34f62a976e4dd2d56eb34e4efa987ddc3e2f31ca.camel@linaro.org>
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2024 15:54:17 +0000
From: André Draszik <andre.draszik@...aro.org>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, 
 Krzysztof Kozlowski
	 <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Peter Griffin
	 <peter.griffin@...aro.org>, Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org>, Alim
 Akhtar <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>
Cc: Will McVicker <willmcvicker@...gle.com>, kernel-team@...roid.com, 
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] dt-bindings: arm: google: add gs101-raven and
 generic gs101-pixel

On Mon, 2024-12-23 at 16:39 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 23/12/2024 16:31, André Draszik wrote:
> > On Mon, 2024-12-23 at 15:14 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > You now say that these are valid boards:
> > > 
> > > compatible = "google,gs101", "google,gs101";
> > 
> > Sorry, I don't see how (apart from the fact that dtbs_check flags
> > non-unique elements anyway). The result of the patch is:
> > 
> >         minItems: 2
> >         maxItems: 3
> >         items:
> >           enum:
> >             - google,gs101-oriole
> >             - google,gs101-raven
> >             - google,gs101-pixel
> >             - google,gs101
> 
> The problem is this line. Although entire concept of flexible list is
> neither need nor ever recommended.

All of this was inspired by Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/xilinx/xilinx.yaml
I guess not a good example in this case...

> 
> >         allOf:
> >           - contains:
> >               const: google,gs101-pixel
> >           - contains:
> >               const: google,gs101
> > 
> > So one can not have 'google,gs101' twice. And if I only add
> 
> Still can be, but indeed not with my example but:
> 
> "google,gs101", "google,gs101", "google,gs101-pixel";

This example doesn't pass irrespective of binding, because
dtbs_check will complain about non-unique elements.

Anyway, will use separate entries.


Thanks Krzysztof,
Cheers,
Andre'

>