linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 1/8] dt-bindings: serial: describe SA8255p

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: <2f3e608b-5536-4c6d-b7ca-c8cf4c9d0b1b@quicinc.com>
Date: Thu, 8 May 2025 11:15:53 +0530
From: Praveen Talari <quic_ptalari@...cinc.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman
	<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>, Rob Herring
	<robh@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
        Conor Dooley
	<conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio
	<konradybcio@...nel.org>,
        <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
CC: <psodagud@...cinc.com>, <djaggi@...cinc.com>, <quic_msavaliy@...cinc.com>,
        <quic_vtanuku@...cinc.com>, <quic_arandive@...cinc.com>,
        <quic_mnaresh@...cinc.com>, <quic_shazhuss@...cinc.com>,
        Nikunj Kela
	<quic_nkela@...cinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/8] dt-bindings: serial: describe SA8255p

Hi Krzysztof

Thank you for your patience. I consider your inputs as valuable learning.

On 5/6/2025 11:53 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 06/05/2025 20:02, Praveen Talari wrote:
>> +
>> +properties:
>> +  compatible:
>> +    enum:
>> +      - qcom,sa8255p-geni-uart
>> +      - qcom,sa8255p-geni-debug-uart
>> +
>> +  reg:
>> +    maxItems: 1
>> +
>> +  interrupts:
>> +    minItems: 1
> Nothing changed here, this should be dropped based on previous discussion.
>
> You sent this v5 on 8:02 PM of my time. *THEN* you responded to my
> comment at v4 at 8:05 PM. That's the way to waste everyone's time.
>
> I do not understand why interrupt is optional for a new, complete device
> description.

On this platform, there is no use case of waking up UART, so we consider 
the  wake up IRQ as optional.

Thanks,

Praveen

>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof