linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 5/7] arm64: dts: axiado: Add initial support for AX3000 SoC and eval board

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: <4d4bf02a-4c0a-4051-bed2-8a089d310ad2@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2025 07:58:36 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Harshit Shah <hshah@...ado.com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
 <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
 Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
 Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
 Jan Kotas <jank@...ence.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>,
 "linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
 "soc@...ts.linux.dev" <soc@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/7] arm64: dts: axiado: Add initial support for AX3000
 SoC and eval board

On 27/06/2025 02:47, Harshit Shah wrote:
>>> Is this name look good?
>> No, all compatibles for SoC must be SoC specific. Take any recent
>> Qualcomm SM8650 or SM8750 as example.
>>
>> I asked to read writing bindings. Did you read it? It covers exactly
>> this case.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Krzysztof
> 
> 
> Extremely sorry for the last reply. It got messed up in formatting, 
> re-sending the same.
> 
> 
> Thank you for the references.
> 
> Yes, I missed the point in the writing bindings doc. It says the following:
> 
> 
> "For sub-blocks/components of bigger device (e.g. SoC blocks) use rather 
> device-based compatible (e.g. SoC-based compatible),
> 
>   instead of custom versioning of that component. For example use 
> "vendor,soc1234-i2c" instead of "vendor,i2c-v2"."
> 
> 
> (Ref: 
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.15.3/source/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/writing-bindings.rst#L79) 
> 
> 
> # We need to add the full SoC name instead of versioning. e.g. 
> compatible should contain full SoC name ax3000.

Yes.

> 
> 
> Another example, we have seen is the designware I2C IP is used by MSCC, 
> ocelot chipset.
> 
> It is showing as below in the following: 
> (https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.16-rc3/source/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/snps,designware-i2c.yaml) 
> 
> 
>      i2c@...400 {
> 
>        compatible = "mscc,ocelot-i2c", "snps,designware-i2c";
> 
>        reg = <0x100400 0x100>, <0x198 0x8>;
> 
>        pinctrl-0 = <&i2c_pins>;
> 
>        pinctrl-names = "default";
> 
>        interrupts = <8>;
> 
>        clocks = <&ahb_clk>;
> 
>      };
> 
> 
> # We will add this compatible in the existing driver 
> (drivers/tty/serial/xilinx_uartps.c) &
> 
> bindings (Documentation/devicetree/bindings/serial/cdns,uart.yaml) since 
> the IP is common.
> 
> 
> As per the above examples,  I see two types of bindings.
> 
> 1. compatible = "axiado,ax3000-uart", "cdns,uart-r1p12"


This one. Thank you.


Best regards,
Krzysztof