netdev - Re: [PATCH 30/31] dt-bindings: nds32 CPU Bindings

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: <CABGGisw5gi92aM0_tZ0htOzwZTFJpcSNZUJth5TzRXPxzssRxA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 9 Nov 2017 07:57:48 -0600
From:   Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To:     Greentime Hu <green.hu@...il.com>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Greentime <greentime@...estech.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        "linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Vincent Chen <vincentc@...estech.com>,
        Rick Chen <rick@...estech.com>, Zong Li <zong@...estech.com>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 30/31] dt-bindings: nds32 CPU Bindings

On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 3:39 AM, Greentime Hu <green.hu@...il.com> wrote:
> 2017-11-08 21:18 GMT+08:00 Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>:
>> Please Cc the DT list on bindings.
>
> Sorry. I am not sure what you mean.
> Do you mean add devicetree@...r.kernel.org to cc list?

Yes. Use get_maintainers.pl as a guide.

>> On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 11:55 PM, Greentime Hu <green.hu@...il.com> wrote:
>>> From: Greentime Hu <greentime@...estech.com>
>>

>>> +                       device_type = "cpu";
>>> +                       compatible = "andestech,n13", "andestech,n15";
>>
>> n13 is a superset of n15?
>
> No, they are independent ones.

Then having both is not valid. The strings should be in order of best
match to worst match where worst match is typically either older
implementations of IP blocks or generic'ish strings such as "ns16550"
for a UART.

Rob