netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 02/14] dt-bindings: dpll: Add support for Microchip Azurite chip family

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: <1a78fc71-fcf6-446e-9ada-c14420f9c5fe@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2025 09:45:47 +0200
From: Ivan Vecera <ivecera@...hat.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev>,
 Arkadiusz Kubalewski <arkadiusz.kubalewski@...el.com>,
 Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
 <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Prathosh Satish <Prathosh.Satish@...rochip.com>,
 Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>, Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>,
 Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>, Andrew Morton
 <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Michal Schmidt <mschmidt@...hat.com>,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/14] dt-bindings: dpll: Add support for Microchip
 Azurite chip family



On 10. 04. 25 9:06 dop., Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 09, 2025 at 04:42:38PM GMT, Ivan Vecera wrote:
>> Add DT bindings for Microchip Azurite DPLL chip family. These chips
>> provides 2 independent DPLL channels, up to 10 differential or
>> single-ended inputs and up to 20 differential or 20 single-ended outputs.
>> It can be connected via I2C or SPI busses.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ivan Vecera <ivecera@...hat.com>
>> ---
>>   .../bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml  | 74 ++++++++++++++++++
>>   .../bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml  | 77 +++++++++++++++++++
> 
> No, you do not get two files. No such bindings were accepted since some
> years.
> 
>>   2 files changed, 151 insertions(+)
>>   create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml
>>   create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000000000..d9280988f9eb7
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml
>> @@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause)
>> +%YAML 1.2
>> +---
>> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-i2c.yaml#
>> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
>> +
>> +title: I2C-attached Microchip Azurite DPLL device
>> +
>> +maintainers:
>> +  - Ivan Vecera <ivecera@...hat.com>
>> +
>> +description:
>> +  Microchip Azurite DPLL (ZL3073x) is a family of DPLL devices that
>> +  provides 2 independent DPLL channels, up to 10 differential or
>> +  single-ended inputs and up to 20 differential or 20 single-ended outputs.
>> +  It can be connected via multiple busses, one of them being I2C.
>> +
>> +properties:
>> +  compatible:
>> +    enum:
>> +      - microchip,zl3073x-i2c
> 
> I already said: you have one compatible, not two. One.

Ah, you mean something like:
iio/accel/adi,adxl313.yaml

Do you?

> Also, still wildcard, so still a no.

This is not wildcard, Microchip uses this to designate DPLL devices with 
the same characteristics.

But I can use microchip,azurite, is it more appropriate?

>> +
>> +  reg:
>> +    maxItems: 1
>> +
>> +required:
>> +  - compatible
>> +  - reg
>> +
>> +allOf:
>> +  - $ref: /schemas/dpll/dpll-device.yaml#
>> +
>> +unevaluatedProperties: false
>> +
>> +examples:
>> +  - |
>> +    i2c {
>> +      #address-cells = <1>;
>> +      #size-cells = <0>;
>> +
>> +      dpll@70 {
>> +        compatible = "microchip,zl3073x-i2c";
>> +        reg = <0x70>;
>> +        #address-cells = <0>;
>> +        #size-cells = <0>;
> 
> Again, not used. Drop.

Sorry, will do.

>> +        dpll-types = "pps", "eec";
>> +
>> +        input-pins {
>> +          #address-cells = <1>;
>> +          #size-cells = <0>;
>> +
>> +          pin@0 { /* REF0P */
>> +            reg = <0>;
>> +            label = "Input 0";
>> +            supported-frequencies = /bits/ 64 <1 1000>;
>> +            type = "ext";
>> +          };
>> +        };
>> +
>> +        output-pins {
>> +          #address-cells = <1>;
>> +          #size-cells = <0>;
>> +
>> +          pin@3 { /* OUT1N */
>> +            reg = <3>;
>> +            esync-control;
>> +            label = "Output 1";
>> +            supported-frequencies = /bits/ 64 <1 10000>;
>> +            type = "gnss";
>> +          };
>> +        };
>> +      };
>> +    };
>> +...
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000000000..7bd6e5099e1ce
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/dpll/microchip,zl3073x-spi.yaml
> 
> No, you do not get two files. Neither two compatibles, nor two files.
> Please look at existing bindings how they do it for such devices.

Thanks Krzysztof for comments.

Ivan