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  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]
Date:   Wed, 6 May 2020 17:07:46 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>
Cc:     Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Marek Vasut <marex@...x.de>, David Jander <david@...tonic.nl>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] dt-bindings: net: nxp,tja11xx: rework validation
 support

> > Hi Oleksij
> > 
> > reg is normally 0 to 31, since that is the address range for MDIO. 
> > Did you use 14 here because of what strapping allows?
> 
> Yes. Only BITs 1:3 are configurable. BIT(0) is always 0 for the PHY0 and 1
> for the PHY1

O.K. good.

> > > +required:
> > > +  - compatible
> > > +  - reg
> > > +  - '#address-cells'
> > > +  - '#size-cells'
> > 
> > So we have two different meanings of 'required' here.
> > 
> > One meaning is the code requires it. compatible is not required, the
> > driver will correctly be bind to the device based on its ID registers.
> > Is reg also required by the code?
> > 
> > The second meaning is about keeping the yaml verifier happy. It seems
> > like compatible is needed for the verifier. Is reg also required? We
> > do recommend having reg, but the generic code does not require it.
> 
> reg is used by:
> tja1102_p0_probe()
>   tja1102_p1_register()
>     of_mdio_parse_addr()
> 
> But this is required for the slave PHY. I assume the reg can be
> optional for the master PHY. Should I?

It is recommended to have a reg value. So lets leave it as is for the
moment. If anybody really does need it to be optional, we can change
it later.

Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>

    Andrew

Powered by blists - more mailing lists