linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] dt-bindings: gnss: add u-blox,neo-9m compatible

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: <20250527173301.GA756121-robh@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2025 12:33:01 -0500
From: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc: Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>, alejandroe1@...tab.com,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] dt-bindings: gnss: add u-blox,neo-9m compatible

On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 01:14:54PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 27/05/2025 13:02, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 12:51:12PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >> On 27/05/2025 12:44, Johan Hovold wrote:
> >>> On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 10:35:14AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >>>> On 23/05/2025 13:52, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >>>>> On 23/05/2025 13:19, Alejandro Enrique via B4 Relay wrote:
> >>>>>> From: Alejandro Enrique <alejandroe1@...tab.com>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Add compatible for u-blox NEO-9M GPS module.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Alejandro Enrique <alejandroe1@...tab.com>
> >>>>>> ---
> >>>>>> This series just add the compatible string for u-blox NEO-9M module,
> >>>>>> using neo-m8 as fallback. I have tested the driver with such a module
> >>>>>> and it is working fine.
> >>>>>> ---
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I assume there is a user somewhere?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
> >>>> Un-reviewed. Please drop the patch. It turns out there is no user for
> >>>> this binding. We don't take bindings for every possible device out there
> >>>> - you need users of that binding.
> >>>
> >>> No, we don't require manufacturers to upstream their machine dts.
> >>
> >> No, we don't take bindings for whatever is there. In any case, drop my
> >> review tag.
> > 
> > Perhaps not for whatever, but here we have an actual user that needs
> > this binding do I'll take it.
> 
> Great, I understand above that I can send you bindings for multiple
> devices I have (or had and still have interest in or my previous
> employer has interest in), which are used in downstream products, and
> you will take these bindings?
> 
> That would be cool, because I have bunch of GNSS devices related to my
> pre-previous job, which I would really like to upstream.
> 
> Is my understanding correct?

What's the issue here? We have a driver and that's the user. The 
requirement is a driver OR .dts for the user. Are we now discouraging 
having a specific compatible for a new device that's backwards 
compatible with an existing device? No!

Rob