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: <7a650d60cabcbd33b65c954b0c9c5918dfcabb09.camel@codeconstruct.com.au>
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2025 16:40:39 +0800
From: Jeremy Kerr <jk@...econstruct.com.au>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>, Ryan Chen
 <ryan_chen@...eedtech.com>
Cc: benh@...nel.crashing.org, joel@....id.au, andi.shyti@...nel.org, 
 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

Hi Krzysztof,

> On 24/10/2025 09:56, Jeremy Kerr wrote:
> > Hi Krzysztof,
> > 
> > > Although now I saw next patch, so clearly this commit is
> > > incomplete.
> > 
> > The split that Ryan has done here - by shifting to an identical
> > separate
> > binding, then making the changes explicit - allows us to review the
> > actual changes without losing them in the move. Sounds like a
> > benefit to
> > me?
> 
> Not related. I commented that rationale is incomplete. We do not move
> parts of bindings because new device is someway different. There are
> hundreds of bindings which cover different devices. We move them
> because the binding is different.

OK, but in that case I think we're after guidance on the threshold for
"difference" here.

> Not much different than every other soc. All of them are separate IPs.
> Look at any Samsung, NXP or Qualcomm binding. Separate IPs.

So, something like this?

    allOf:
      - $ref: /schemas/i2c/i2c-controller.yaml#
      - if:
          properties:
            compatible:
              contains:
                enum:
                  - aspeed,ast2600-i2c-bus
        then:
          required:
            - aspeed,global-regs


I can't see how we could represent aspeed,transfer-mode though, as it's
optional on aspeed,ast2600-i2c-bus, but prohibited on others. Any hints
on that?

Cheers,


Jeremy