linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: input: add ST-Microelectronics FTS2BA61Y touchscreen binding

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: <CF4D01CD-5C96-44A1-B7E0-BF3D77EFE5F5@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2025 13:16:54 -0300
From: Eric Gonçalves <ghatto404@...il.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
 Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
 Henrik Rydberg <rydberg@...math.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>
CC: Ivaylo Ivanov <ivo.ivanov.ivanov1@...il.com>, linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: input: add ST-Microelectronics FTS2BA61Y touchscreen binding



On September 14, 2025 11:48:49 AM GMT-03:00, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org> wrote:
>On 11/09/2025 23:19, Eric Gonçalves wrote:
>> Add the bindings for ST-Microelectronics FTS2BA61Y capacitive touchscreen.
>
>Please wrap commit message according to Linux coding style / submission
>process (neither too early nor over the limit):
>https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.4-rc1/source/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst#L597
The commit description is 74 characters
long, and the name is 73?
>
>A nit, subject: drop second/last, redundant "bindings". The
>"dt-bindings" prefix is already stating that these are bindings.
>See also:
>https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.17-rc3/source/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.rst#L18
Thanks, will do!
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Eric Gonçalves <ghatto404@...il.com>
>
>
>
>> +
>> +properties:
>> +  compatible:
>> +    const: st,fts2ba61y
>> +
>> +  reg:
>> +    maxItems: 1
>> +
>> +  interrupts:
>> +    maxItems: 1
>> +
>> +  avdd-supply: true
>> +  vdd-supply: true
>> +
>> +unevaluatedProperties: false
>
>This goes after required: field.
>
>Other than that - why isn't this finished (non RFC)? Code looks ok, but
>I also did not look that thorough.
>
>Best regards,
>Krzysztof