linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: pinctrl: document the Eliza Top Level Mode Multiplexer

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: <m2nydmdqzqrtwbqkj3sf4r7zyk4pjj5ruc6fu2b4ysy74b6u5g@ex347qlw4ezk>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2026 12:57:19 +0200
From: Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@....qualcomm.com>
To: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linusw@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] dt-bindings: pinctrl: document the Eliza Top
 Level Mode Multiplexer

On 26-01-29 11:45:59, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> On 1/29/26 11:41 AM, Abel Vesa wrote:
> > On 26-01-29 11:34:07, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> >> On 1/28/26 6:22 PM, Abel Vesa wrote:
> >>> On 26-01-28 12:38:32, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >>>> On Tue, Jan 27, 2026 at 05:47:36PM +0200, Abel Vesa wrote:
> >>>>> Document the Top Level Mode Multiplexer on the Eliza Platform.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@....qualcomm.com>
> >>>>> ---
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> +  gpio-line-names:
> >>>>> +    maxItems: 185
> >>>>
> >>>> 186, your first GPIO is 0 and last is 185.
> >>>
> >>> Actually it is 0 through 184. The 185 is ufs reset.
> >>
> >> The UFS reset also happens to be a GPIO..
> > 
> > So the gpio-line-names should include the ufs reset,
> > but the pattern not.
> 
> Why not?

I was drawing the conclusion. No question mark. :)

> 
> Do you see a reference to ufs_reset anywhere in DT?
> 
> Konrad