| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <ab483a68-40a8-4b44-ad73-d8a34bd32c69@kernel.org> Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2025 14:51:05 +0100 From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org> To: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org> Cc: Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>, Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: memory-controllers: samsung,exynos4210-srom: Enforce child props On 06/03/2025 14:39, Rob Herring wrote: > Why do we need this? Any child node should have a schema which needs > to include mc-peripheral-props.yaml if any properties from it can be > used. >From correctness point of view, you are right, we don't need it. However: 1. Convention was so far to have in every controller. I think this also is easier to understand whenever one reads the bindings - clear documentation what children on this bus should look like. 2. To clearly document from where samsung,srom-timing comes in the required block: https://web.git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/robh/linux.git/tree/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/memory-controllers/exynos-srom.yaml?h=dt/next#n50 Otherwise for me it is a bit confusing to require a property which is nowhere here defined. Best regards, Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists