linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/6] dt-bindings: display/msm: gpu: Document A612 GPU

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <89601075-a312-478e-925d-3cc0b1e9471a@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2025 08:58:14 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Akhil P Oommen <akhilpo@....qualcomm.com>
Cc: Rob Clark <robin.clark@....qualcomm.com>, Sean Paul <sean@...rly.run>,
 Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>, Dmitry Baryshkov <lumag@...nel.org>,
 Abhinav Kumar <abhinav.kumar@...ux.dev>,
 Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@...ainline.org>,
 David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, Simona Vetter <simona@...ll.ch>,
 Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
 Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
 Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
 Jessica Zhang <jesszhan0024@...il.com>,
 Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
 dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/6] dt-bindings: display/msm: gpu: Document A612 GPU

On 24/11/2025 22:39, Akhil P Oommen wrote:
> On 11/22/2025 4:32 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 22, 2025 at 03:22:16AM +0530, Akhil P Oommen wrote:
>>> +
>>> +  - if:
>>> +      properties:
>>> +        compatible:
>>> +          contains:
>>> +            const: qcom,adreno-612.0
>>> +    then:
>>> +      properties:
>>> +        clocks:
>>> +          items:
>>> +            - description: GPU Core clock
>>> +
>>> +        clock-names:
>>> +          items:
>>> +            - const: core
>>> +
>>> +      required:
>>> +        - clocks
>>> +        - clock-names
>>> +
>>>      else:
>>
>> I am pretty sure you break not only intention/logic behindi this else,
>> but actually cause real warnings to appear.
>>
>> The else was intentional, right? So the pattern further will not match
>> some of devices defined in if:. Now else is for different part, so only
>> 612 out of these devices is excluded.
>>
>> There is a reason we do not want ever else:if: in bindings. If it
>> appeared, sure, maybe there is some benefit of it, but it means you need
>> to be more careful now.
> 
> Aah! I missed that this comes under an 'allOf'. Not an expert in this

The allOf does not matter here. If these were separate if:then: then it
would be the same.

> syntax, does moving this entire block under an 'else' make sense? Or is

No, never nest blocks.

> there a saner alternative?

Not sure, I don't remember the code. Original code was not easy to read,
with your changes it will not be easier. So the only alternative I see
is to make it simple and obvious.


Best regards,
Krzysztof