linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] dt-bindings: hwmon: add support for MCP998X

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: <a306b2ad-b973-4e89-b4e1-305816179218@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2026 17:51:20 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Victor.Duicu@...rochip.com, linux@...ck-us.net
Cc: corbet@....net, linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 robh@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org,
 linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, Marius.Cristea@...rochip.com, conor+dt@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] dt-bindings: hwmon: add support for MCP998X

On 06/02/2026 17:49, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 06/02/2026 15:17, Victor.Duicu@...rochip.com wrote:
>>>> +
>>>> +  interrupts:
>>>> +    items:
>>>> +      - description: Signal coming from ALERT/THERM pin.
>>>> +      - description: Signal coming from THERM/ADDR pin.
>>>> +      - description: Signal coming from SYS_SHDN pin.
>>>> +
>>>> +  interrupt-names:
>>>> +    items:
>>>> +      - const: alert-therm
>>>> +      - const: therm-addr
>>>> +      - const: sys-shutdown
>>>
>>> The top-level definition of interrupt-names specifies exactly 3
>>> items.
>>> How does this interact with variants that only have 2 interrupts?
>>>
>>
>> The chips with "D" in the family have the sys-shutdown and alert-therm
>> interrupt pins. The rest have alert-therm and therm-addr interrupt
>> pins. The conditional assigns the interrupt names depending on the
>> chip.
> 
> 
> No, the top level says you have three interrupts. Do not create bindings
> which contradict themselves.
> 
> More important I am 100% sure this fails tests if you wrote proper, so a
> complete example. It passes only because you made a limited example,
> without properties.
> 
> No, drop review, fix and request re-review.

And I already TOLD YOU THIS!

https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250901-piquant-rousing-skunk-14da73@kuoka/

Which you completely ignored!

So you received review, you ignored it and kept pushing buggy patch.

NAK

Best regards,
Krzysztof