linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] dt-bindings: net: Add FSD EQoS device tree bindings

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: <7d50f55d-d0cd-4741-ab55-2f54dc45d6ab@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2025 08:31:42 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Swathi K S <swathi.ks@...sung.com>
Cc: krzk+dt@...nel.org, andrew+netdev@...n.ch, davem@...emloft.net,
 edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, robh@...nel.org,
 conor+dt@...nel.org, richardcochran@...il.com, mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com,
 alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com, rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] dt-bindings: net: Add FSD EQoS device tree
 bindings

On 14/02/2025 05:53, Swathi K S wrote:
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
>> Sent: 13 February 2025 17:31
>> To: Swathi K S <swathi.ks@...sung.com>
>> Cc: krzk+dt@...nel.org; andrew+netdev@...n.ch; davem@...emloft.net;
>> edumazet@...gle.com; kuba@...nel.org; pabeni@...hat.com;
>> robh@...nel.org; conor+dt@...nel.org; richardcochran@...il.com;
>> mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com; alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com;
>> rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk; netdev@...r.kernel.org;
>> devicetree@...r.kernel.org; linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com;
>> linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] dt-bindings: net: Add FSD EQoS device tree
>> bindings
>>
>> On 13/02/2025 12:04, Swathi K S wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
>>>> Sent: 13 February 2025 13:24
>>>> To: Swathi K S <swathi.ks@...sung.com>
>>>> Cc: krzk+dt@...nel.org; andrew+netdev@...n.ch;
>> davem@...emloft.net;
>>>> edumazet@...gle.com; kuba@...nel.org; pabeni@...hat.com;
>>>> robh@...nel.org; conor+dt@...nel.org; richardcochran@...il.com;
>>>> mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com; alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com;
>>>> rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk; netdev@...r.kernel.org;
>>>> devicetree@...r.kernel.org; linux-stm32@...md-
>> mailman.stormreply.com;
>>>> linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] dt-bindings: net: Add FSD EQoS device
>>>> tree bindings
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 10:16:23AM +0530, Swathi K S wrote:
>>>>> +  clock-names:
>>>>> +    minItems: 5
>>>>> +    maxItems: 10
>>>>> +    contains:
>>>>> +      enum:
>>>>> +        - ptp_ref
>>>>> +        - master_bus
>>>>> +        - slave_bus
>>>>> +        - tx
>>>>> +        - rx
>>>>> +        - master2_bus
>>>>> +        - slave2_bus
>>>>> +        - eqos_rxclk_mux
>>>>> +        - eqos_phyrxclk
>>>>> +        - dout_peric_rgmii_clk
>>>>
>>>> This does not match the previous entry. It should be strictly ordered
>>>> with
>>>> minItems: 5.
>>>
>>> Hi Krzysztof,
>>> Thanks for reviewing.
>>> In FSD SoC, we have 2 instances of ethernet in two blocks.
>>> One instance needs 5 clocks and the other needs 10 clocks.
>>
>> I understand and I do not think this is contradictory to what I asked.
>> If it is, then why/how?
>>
>>>
>>> I tried to understand this by looking at some other dt-binding files
>>> as given below, but looks like they follow similar approach
>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/stm32-dwmac.yaml
>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/rockchip-dwmac.yaml
>>>
>>> Could you please guide me on how to implement this?
>>> Also, please help me understand what is meant by 'strictly ordered'
>>
>> Every other 99% of bindings. Just like your clocks property.
> 
> Hi Krzysztof,
> Thanks for your feedback.
> I want to make sure I fully understand your comment. 
> I can see we have added clocks and clock names in the same order.

No, you did not. You can see syntax is very different - one uses items,
other uses contains-enum. And now test it, change the order in DTS and
see if you see any warning.

> Could you please help in detail what specifically needs to be modified regarding the ordering and minItems/maxItems usage?
You did not try hard enough.

Open other bindings and look how they list clocks. For example any
Samsung clock controller bindings. Or any qcom bindings.

Best regards,
Krzysztof