linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] dt-bindings: hwmon: update TI TPS23861 bindings with per-port schema

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250818173147.GA1496879-robh@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2025 12:31:47 -0500
From: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
	Gregory Fuchedgi <gfuchedgi@...il.com>
Cc: Robert Marko <robert.marko@...tura.hr>,
	Luka Perkov <luka.perkov@...tura.hr>,
	Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.com>,
	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] dt-bindings: hwmon: update TI TPS23861 bindings
 with per-port schema

On Sun, Aug 17, 2025 at 09:23:09AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 13/08/2025 05:00, Gregory Fuchedgi wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 12, 2025 at 12:20 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org> wrote:
> >>> +  shutdown-gpios:
> >> powerdown-gpios, see gpio-consumer-common.yaml
> > It is called shutdown in the datasheet, but seems like neither powerdown nor
> > shutdown truly reflects its purpose. This pin doesn't power down the controller
> > itself. It shuts down the ports while keeping the controller available for
> > configuration over i2c. Should I call it ti,ports-shutdown-gpios or maybe
> > ti,shutdown-gpios? Any other suggestions?
> 
> 
> Feels more like enable-gpios.
> 
> > 
> >>> +patternProperties:
> >>> +  "^port@[0-3]$":
> >> This goes to ports property.
> > Do you mean I should add another DT node that groups all ports? such as:
> > compatible = "ti,tps23861"; ports { port@0 {...} port@1 {...} }
> 
> 
> Yes.

Except this is not an OF graph. Don't re-use it when it is not that. 
Maybe 'poe-port@'? Is multiple ports/channels something common on PoE 
chips? I'd guess so. If so, then come up with something common.

Whether you should have a container node like 'ports' is a separate 
question. You get exactly 1 address space for any given node. So if you 
ever might need to address multiple disjoint things, then you probably 
want a container node.

Rob