netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] dt-bindings: net: dsa: b53: Add YAML 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: <20201012184803.GB1886314@bogus>
Date:   Mon, 12 Oct 2020 13:48:03 -0500
From:   Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To:     Kurt Kanzenbach <kurt@...utronix.de>
Cc:     Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Kurt Kanzenbach <kurt@...-computers.de>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] dt-bindings: net: dsa: b53: Add YAML
 bindings

On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 07:45:10AM +0200, Kurt Kanzenbach wrote:
> On Sun Oct 11 2020, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> > On 10/11/2020 1:32 AM, Kurt Kanzenbach wrote:
> >> How should we proceed? Adding the missing compatible strings and ports
> >> to the DTS files? Or adjusting the include files?
> >
> > The include is correct as it provides the fallback family string which 
> > is what the driver will be looking for unless we do not provide a chip 
> > compatible. The various DTS should be updated to contain both the chip 
> > compatible and the fallback family (brcm,bcm5301x-srab) string, I will 
> > update the various DTS and submit these for review later next week.
> 
> OK. It's not just the compatible strings, there are other issues as
> well. You can check with `make dtbs_check DT_SCHEMA_FILES=path/to/b53.yaml'.
> 
> >
> > Then we could imagine me taking this YAML change through the Broadcom 
> > ARM SoC pull requests that way no new regressions are introduced.
> >
> > Sounds good?
> 
> Sounds like a plan. But, Rob or other device tree maintainers should
> have a look at the YAML file to spot issues in there first.

Looks pretty good to me.

Rob