linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] arm64: dts: imx8m: Add pinctrl config definitions

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <0e233b5210e3245266fd1954e0fd198bc6864c24.camel@pengutronix.de>
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2025 10:21:23 +0100
From: Lucas Stach <l.stach@...gutronix.de>
To: Maud Spierings | GOcontroll <maudspierings@...ontroll.com>, Rob Herring
 <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
 <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>, Sascha Hauer
 <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>, Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>, 
 Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>
Cc: "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, 
 "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
	 <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
	 <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, "imx@...ts.linux.dev"
	 <imx@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] arm64: dts: imx8m: Add pinctrl config definitions

Am Samstag, dem 15.02.2025 um 10:02 +0000 schrieb Maud Spierings |
GOcontroll:
> From: Lucas Stach <l.stach@...gutronix.de>
> Sent: Friday, February 14, 2025 5:28 PM
>  
> > Hi Maud,
> 
> > Am Freitag, dem 14.02.2025 um 16:57 +0100 schrieb Maud Spierings via B4
> > Relay:
> > > Up untill now the extra function mux (pull resistor, etc) has been
> > > defined as a raw hex value, this is difficult to interpret. Add
> > > definitions for these parts of the pinctrl registers to allow for more
> > > readable pinctrl definitions in devictree files.
> 
> > I certainly prefer the short form with the hex value, I find that quite
> > a bit more readable than very verbose swathes of defines ORed together.
> > But each to their own.
> 
> I personally prefer it, but it would be accepted if I write a dts using this if it
> gets accepted? I am currently working on devicetrees for all of our devices
> preferably they would use this.
> 
I'm not the ultimate authority on this, as I'm not the official
maintainer of the i.MX DTs. That would be Shawn, so he has to agree to
this. However, my gut feeling is that it would be accepted if you as
the author of the board DT prefer this style.

Just don't go around and convert other board DTs maintained by other
people to the verbose define style.

Regards,
Lucas