linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/13] spi: dt-bindings: cdns,qspi-nor: Add Renesas RZ/N1D400 to the list

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: <87bjiww8ba.fsf@bootlin.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2026 15:57:45 +0100
From: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
To: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,  Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
  Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,  Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
  Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,  Geert Uytterhoeven
 <geert+renesas@...der.be>,  Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>,  Vaishnav
 Achath <vaishnav.a@...com>,  Thomas Petazzoni
 <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>,  Hervé Codina
 <herve.codina@...tlin.com>,
  Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,  Santhosh Kumar K <s-k6@...com>,
  Pratyush Yadav <pratyush@...nel.org>,  Pascal Eberhard
 <pascal.eberhard@...com>,  linux-spi@...r.kernel.org,
  devicetree@...r.kernel.org,  linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
  linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/13] spi: dt-bindings: cdns,qspi-nor: Add Renesas
 RZ/N1D400 to the list

On 20/12/2025 at 11:13:09 +01, Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com> wrote:

>> > +      - items:
>> > +          - const: renesas,r9a06g032-qspi
>> 
>> This should be enum, knowing how Renesas adds more devices.
>
> In general, yes...
>
>> 
>> > +          - const: renesas,rzn1-qspi
>
> ... but this platform is old. We are at N2 meanwhile. Extremly likely
> that no more N1 variants come out. And the other existing ones cannot
> run Linux (no SDRAM interface). I think const is fine in this case.

Indeed, it is a rather old SoC, unlikely to get new cousins, but I don't
mind switching to enum either, I like future proof descriptions :), so
either ways I'm fine.

Cheers,
Miquèl