linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 1/4] dt-bindings: phy: add samsung,exynos2200-snps-eusb2-phy schema file

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: <b7cab5cc-c560-4128-8f2b-184ffb400d01@kernel.org>
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2025 10:37:04 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Ivaylo Ivanov <ivo.ivanov.ivanov1@...il.com>,
 Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@...ow.org>, Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>,
 Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
 <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
 Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/4] dt-bindings: phy: add
 samsung,exynos2200-snps-eusb2-phy schema file

On 16/02/2025 10:27, Ivaylo Ivanov wrote:
> On 2/16/25 11:22, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 16/02/2025 10:14, Diederik de Haas wrote:
>>>> +examples:
>>>> +  - |
>>>> +    #include <dt-bindings/clock/samsung,exynos2200.h>
>>>> +
>>>> +    usb_hsphy: phy@...b0000 {
>>>> +        compatible = "samsung,exynos2200-snps-eusb2-phy";
>>>> +        reg = <0 0x10ab0000 0 0x10000>;
>>>> +        clocks = <&cmu_hsi0 CLK_MOUT_HSI0_USB32DRD>,
>>>> +                 <&cmu_hsi0 CLK_MOUT_HSI0_NOC>,
>>>> +                 <&cmu_hsi0 CLK_DOUT_DIV_CLK_HSI0_EUSB>;
>>>> +        clock-names = "ref", "apb", "ctrl";
>>>> +        #phy-cells = <0>;
>>>> +        phys = <&usbcon_phy>;
>>>> +    };
>>> Shouldn't the example have at least all the *required* properties?
>>> Same for patch 2 of this series.
>>
>> Yeah, this wasn't ever tested.
> 
> Device trees were tested with dtbs_check W=1 but I overlooked testing bindings
> with dt_bindings_check. Anyways this is rather a small problem, will be fixed
> in a v2.
> 

This makes the bindings unreviewable and they will be marked as "changes
requested".

Best regards,
Krzysztof