linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v20 1/4] dt-bindings: i2c: Split AST2600 binding into a new YAML

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: <2939cae6-2e8a-4528-8e27-8c932e2f82de@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2025 08:50:29 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Ryan Chen <ryan_chen@...eedtech.com>
Cc: benh@...nel.crashing.org, joel@....id.au, andi.shyti@...nel.org,
 jk@...econstruct.com.au, robh@...nel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org,
 conor+dt@...nel.org, andrew@...econstruct.com.au, p.zabel@...gutronix.de,
 andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com, naresh.solanki@...ements.com,
 linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, openbmc@...ts.ozlabs.org,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-aspeed@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v20 1/4] dt-bindings: i2c: Split AST2600 binding into a
 new YAML

On 24/10/2025 08:45, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 21, 2025 at 09:35:45AM +0800, Ryan Chen wrote:
>> The AST2600 I2C controller is a new hardware design compared to the
>> I2C controllers in previous ASPEED SoCs (e.g., AST2400, AST2500).
>>
>> It introduces new features such as:
>>  - A redesigned register layout
>>  - Separation between controller and target mode registers
>>  - Transfer mode selection (byte, buffer, DMA)
>>  - Support for a shared global register block for configuration
>>
>> Due to these fundamental differences, maintaining a separate
>> devicetree binding file for AST2600 helps to clearly distinguish
> 
> No, that's not a valid reason. You just moved the compatible and are
> still 100% identical, at least according to this commit msg, so there is
> no point in this patch.
> 

Although now I saw next patch, so clearly this commit is incomplete. You
mention here almost insufficient arguments which should not make you
make the split, instead of making the actual argument - bindings are
completely different.

... and then we see that bindings are not completely different and there
is no problem in this one file serving all devices just like for many
other cases. You just need allOf:if:then: section to narrow the
constraints/presence of properties. Just like we do for all of the other
devices, really, just look at other bindings.

Best regards,
Krzysztof