linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] dt-bindings: net: Add support for J-Core EMAC

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: <26699eb1-26e8-4676-a7bc-623a1f770149@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2025 10:07:49 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
 Artur Rojek <contact@...ur-rojek.eu>
Cc: Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>, Jeff Dionne <jeff@...esemi.io>,
 John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@...sik.fu-berlin.de>,
 Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, "David S . Miller"
 <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
 Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] dt-bindings: net: Add support for J-Core EMAC

On 18/08/2025 08:43, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>>>
>>> You need SoC-based compatibles. And then also rename the file to match
>>> it.
>>
>> Given how the top-most compatible of the bindings [1] of the board I am
>> using has "jcore,j2-soc", this driver should probably go with
>> "jcore,j2-emac".
>>
>> But as this is an FPGA design, I don't know how widespread the use is
>> across other jcore derived SoCs (if any?).
>> I will wait for Jeff (who's design this is) to clarify on that.
>>
>> PS. Too bad we already have other IP cores following the old pattern:
>>
>>> $ grep -r "compatible = \"jcore," bindings/ | grep -v "emac"
>>> bindings/timer/jcore,pit.yaml:        compatible = "jcore,pit";
>>> bindings/spi/jcore,spi.txt:   compatible = "jcore,spi2";
>>> bindings/interrupt-controller/jcore,aic.yaml:        compatible =
>>> "jcore,aic2";
> 
> I would go with "jcore,emac", as it is already in use.

git grep jcore,emac

Gives me zero?

> If an incompatible version comes up, it should use a different
> (versioned?) compatible value.

Versions are allowed if they follow some documented and known vendor SoC
versioning scheme. Is this the case here?

This is some sort of SoC, right? So it should have actual SoC name?

Best regards,
Krzysztof