netdev - Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] dt-bindings: can: xilinx_can: Add ECC property 'xlnx,has-ecc'

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]

Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2023 09:13:00 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: "Goud, Srinivas" <srinivas.goud@....com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc: "wg@...ndegger.com" <wg@...ndegger.com>,
 "mkl@...gutronix.de" <mkl@...gutronix.de>,
 "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
 "edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>,
 "kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>, "pabeni@...hat.com"
 <pabeni@...hat.com>,
 "krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org" <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
 "conor+dt@...nel.org" <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
 "p.zabel@...gutronix.de" <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
 "git (AMD-Xilinx)" <git@....com>, "Simek, Michal" <michal.simek@....com>,
 "linux-can@...r.kernel.org" <linux-can@...r.kernel.org>,
 "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
 <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
 "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
 "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
 "appana.durga.rao@...inx.com" <appana.durga.rao@...inx.com>,
 "naga.sureshkumar.relli@...inx.com" <naga.sureshkumar.relli@...inx.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] dt-bindings: can: xilinx_can: Add ECC property
 'xlnx,has-ecc'

On 30/08/2023 08:06, Goud, Srinivas wrote:
>>> +
>>>  required:
>>>    - compatible
>>>    - reg
>>> @@ -137,6 +141,7 @@ examples:
>>>          interrupts = <GIC_SPI 59 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
>>>          tx-fifo-depth = <0x40>;
>>>          rx-fifo-depth = <0x40>;
>>> +        xlnx,has-ecc
>>
>> Obviously not tested.
> Will fix it.
> 

Fix it by fixing error or by testing? Can you do both?

Best regards,
Krzysztof