linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: hwmon: pmbus: add lt3074

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: <7c3f107e-2732-4d6e-a9e4-652ae18c16c5@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2025 08:16:10 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
 "Encarnacion, Cedric justine" <Cedricjustine.Encarnacion@...log.com>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.com>,
 Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
 Delphine CC Chiu <Delphine_CC_Chiu@...ynn.com>,
 "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
 "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 "linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org" <linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org>,
 "linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
 "linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: hwmon: pmbus: add lt3074

On 21/03/2025 18:24, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>>
>> Figured. As it turns out, there is also a patch series pending which tries
>> to fix the problem for ir38060 by changing its bindings.
>>
>> I'll dig up my patch series to add a new macro and send it out as RFT.
>>
> 
> Question for DT maintainers:
> 
> Existing bindings, such as
> 	Documentation/devicetree/bindings/regulator/mps,mpq2286.yaml
> expect a nested regulators node even though there is only a single
> regulator. What is the correct approach: Keep the nesting requirement
> for those regulators as is (even if there are no in-tree bindings
> using them), or update the code and the bindings to drop the nesting ?
> 
I would recommend keep the nesting, so don't touch it. There might be
external users, other projects relying on this. You can however
deprecate old node (nesting), if the driver can support both. Not sure
if it is worth the effort.

Best regards,
Krzysztof