linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] ARM: dts: imx: move nand related property under nand@0

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: <aRIPAagk2tzqnoSB@lizhi-Precision-Tower-5810>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2025 11:12:49 -0500
From: Frank Li <Frank.li@....com>
To: Francesco Dolcini <francesco@...cini.it>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
	Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
	Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	imx@...ts.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] ARM: dts: imx: move nand related property under
 nand@0

On Fri, Nov 07, 2025 at 04:52:01PM +0100, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> Hello Frank,
>
> On Wed, Nov 05, 2025 at 10:29:05AM -0500, Frank Li wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 05, 2025 at 12:55:38PM +0100, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 04, 2025 at 05:27:14PM -0500, Frank Li wrote:
> > > > Add child node nand@0 and move NAND related property under it to align
> > > > modern nand-controller.yaml.
> > > >
> > > > Fix below CHECK_DTBS warnings:
> > > >   arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/imx/imx6ull-colibri-aster.dtb: nand-controller@...6000 (fsl,imx6q-gpmi-nand): Unevaluated properties are not allowed ('nand-ecc-mode', 'nand-ecc-step-size', 'nand-ecc-strength', 'nand-on-flash-bbt' were unexpected)
> > > >         from schema $id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/mtd/gpmi-nand.yaml#
> > > >
> > > > Since 2019 year, commit
> > > > (212e496935929 dt-bindings: mtd: Add YAML schemas for the generic NAND options)
> > > > NAND related property is preferred located under nand@<n> even though only
> > > > one NAND chip supported.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@....com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/imx/imx6-logicpd-som.dtsi           |  6 +++++-
> > > >  arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/imx/imx6qdl-icore.dtsi              |  6 +++++-
> > > >  arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/imx/imx6qdl-phytec-pfla02.dtsi      |  6 +++++-
> > > >  arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/imx/imx6qdl-phytec-phycore-som.dtsi |  6 +++++-
> > > >  arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/imx/imx6qdl-skov-cpu.dtsi           |  6 +++++-
> > > >  arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/imx/imx6qdl-tx6.dtsi                |  6 +++++-
> > > >  arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/imx/imx6ul-geam.dts                 |  6 +++++-
> > > >  arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/imx/imx6ul-isiot.dtsi               |  6 +++++-
> > > >  arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/imx/imx6ul-phytec-phycore-som.dtsi  |  6 +++++-
> > > >  arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/imx/imx6ul-tx6ul.dtsi               |  6 +++++-
> > > >  arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/imx/imx6ull-colibri.dtsi            | 12 ++++++++----
> > > >  arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/imx/imx6ull-engicam-microgea.dtsi   | 12 ++++++++----
> > > >  arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/imx/imx6ull-myir-mys-6ulx.dtsi      |  6 +++++-
> > > >  arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/imx/imx6ulz-bsh-smm-m2.dts          |  6 +++++-
> > > >  arch/arm/boot/dts/nxp/imx/imx7-colibri.dtsi               |  8 ++++++--
> > > >  15 files changed, 82 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > >
> > > Was any of these changes tested? Is the driver able to cope with the
> > > binding change?
> >
> > I have not board to do direct test. This format is used at imx8 platform,
> > which use the same gpmi driver.
> >
> > This properties are parsed at mtd common part
> > drivers/mtd/nand/raw/nand_base.c
> >
> > If you have one of above board to test it, it will be appericated.
>
> I did a minimal boot test, on colibri-imx6ull, and the board was booting
> fine, with Linux 6.18.0-rc4 and this patch applied.
>
> I am wondering if there is any impact with the bootloader, this DT is
> used as it is also in U-Boot, and there the NAND driver is for sure
> different. Any comment on this? I was not able to test this combination.

Uboot should have theirself tree, which copy dts and not direct use it.
I worry uboot parser kernel's dtb to do some hot fix for specific boards.
But most likely not related these proptetry, maybe just add partitions.

Frank
>
> Francesco
>
>