netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/1] dt-binding: net: wireless: fix node name in the BCM43xx example

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: <9e7ee577-d01e-150c-1785-52d8b9024775@broadcom.com>
Date:   Mon, 22 May 2017 11:37:56 +0200
From:   Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@...adcom.com>
To:     Andreas Färber <afaerber@...e.de>,
        Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com>
Cc:     robh+dt@...nel.org, kvalo@...eaurora.org, mark.rutland@....com,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] dt-binding: net: wireless: fix node name in the
 BCM43xx example

On 5/21/2017 4:19 PM, Andreas Färber wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Am 16.05.2017 um 21:56 schrieb Martin Blumenstingl:
>> On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 12:05 AM, Arend Van Spriel
>> <arend.vanspriel@...adcom.com> wrote:
>>> On 15-5-2017 22:13, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
>>>> The example in the BCM43xx documentation uses "brcmf" as node name.
>>>> However, wireless devices should be named "wifi" instead. Fix this to
>>>
>>> Since when is that a rule. I never got the memo and the DTC did not ever
>>> complain to me about the naming.
> 
> How do you expect it to? Maintain a blacklist of every device model
> someone might use, including all typo variations?

Not really why I was asking it. Just saying the node name is trivial as 
I don't think there is different kernel behaviour depending on the node 
name.

>> That being said I do not really care
>>> and I suppose it is for the sake of consistency only.
>> I'm not sure if it's actually a rule or (as you already noted) just
>> for consistency. back when I added devicetree support to ath9k Rob
>> pointed out that the node should be named "wifi" (instead of "ath9k"),
>> see [0]
> 
> The general rule is that the node name should be the type of the device,
> not duplicate its compatible string.
> 
> For consistency Rob was asking we use "wifi" as node name.

Fine with that. Not sure how long ago it was that I added this binding, 
but DT folks were involved back than. I never looked back so I should 
not be surprised with new consistency rules. I was just curious about 
the story behind it.

Thanks,
Arend