linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] gpio: 74x164: use a compatible fallback and don't extend the driver

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: <de6b70f2-8fd6-4e2a-a6c1-466698be8a6b@prolan.hu>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2025 14:32:53 +0100
From: Csókás Bence <csokas.bence@...lan.hu>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>, Linus Walleij
	<linus.walleij@...aro.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, "Krzysztof
 Kozlowski" <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, "Maxime
 Ripard" <mripard@...nel.org>, J . Neuschäfer
	<j.ne@...teo.net>, "Geert Uytterhoeven via gmail . com"
	<geert@...ux-m68k.org>
CC: <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Bartosz Golaszewski
	<bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] gpio: 74x164: use a compatible fallback and don't
 extend the driver

Hi,

On 2025. 01. 10. 14:00, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
> 
> There were other suggested solutions (for instance: just use the
> existing compatible for the On Semi variant) but I figured the most
> common approach is to use a fallback value for 100% compatible models
> and this is what Rob suggested as well.
> 
> This reverts the driver change and makes the "onnn,74hc595a" compatible
> use "fairchild,74hc595" as fallback.

Is there any reason to introduce a new compatible name at all? Does some 
pre-existing, widely-used DT blob use it in the wild already? If not, 
then I don't think it's necessary; for any new boards, their DT's 
authors should just use the pre-existing names.

I'm especially against introducing a new, vendor-specific (On Semi, in 
this case) name; if we really want to introduce a new compatible, at 
least make it as generic as possible, i.e. `generic,74x595`, or even 
`generic,spi-shift-register-output`.

> Bartosz Golaszewski (2):
>    Revert "gpio: 74x164: Add On Semi MC74HC595A compat"
>    dt-bindings: gpio: fairchild,74hc595: use a fallback for Semi
>      MC74HC595A
> 
>   .../devicetree/bindings/gpio/fairchild,74hc595.yaml    | 10 ++++++----
>   drivers/gpio/gpio-74x164.c                             |  2 --
>   2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

Bence