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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <60308ba420cdd072ea19e11e2e5e7d4b@walle.cc> Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2022 00:30:02 +0200 From: Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc> To: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org> Cc: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>, Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>, Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>, Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>, Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>, Li Yang <leoyang.li@....com>, Rafał Miłecki <rafal@...ecki.pl>, "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@...gutronix.de> Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 08/14] dt-bindings: mtd: relax the nvmem compatible string Am 2022-08-31 23:48, schrieb Rob Herring: > On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 11:44:17PM +0200, Michael Walle wrote: >> The "user-otp" and "factory-otp" compatible string just depicts a >> generic NVMEM device. But an actual device tree node might as well >> contain a more specific compatible string. Make it possible to add >> more specific binding elsewere and just match part of the compatibles >> here. >> >> Signed-off-by: Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc> >> --- >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mtd/mtd.yaml | 7 ++++--- >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > In hindsight it looks like we are mixing 2 different purposes of 'which > instance is this' and 'what is this'. 'compatible' is supposed to be > the > latter. > > Maybe there's a better way to handle user/factory? There's a similar > need with partitions for A/B or factory/update. I'm not sure I understand what you mean. It has nothing to with user and factory provisionings. SPI flashes have a user programmable and a factory programmable area, some have just one of them. Whereas with A/B you (as in the user or the board manufacturer) defines an area within a memory device to be either slot A or slot B. But here the flash dictates what's factory and what's user storage. It's in the datasheet. HTH -michael
Powered by blists - more mailing lists