netdev - Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next 01/12] dt-bindings: dpll: add common dpll-pin-consumer schema

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: <bee863d4-81a4-421c-b57e-b27843ca308b@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2026 17:48:14 +0100
From: Ivan Vecera <ivecera@...hat.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
 Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
 Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>, Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
 linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>,
 Arkadiusz Kubalewski <arkadiusz.kubalewski@...el.com>,
 intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
 Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
 Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
 Prathosh Satish <Prathosh.Satish@...rochip.com>,
 Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 Mark Bloch <mbloch@...dia.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>,
 Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>,
 Jonathan Lemon <jonathan.lemon@...il.com>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Saeed Mahameed
 <saeedm@...dia.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next 01/12] dt-bindings: dpll: add
 common dpll-pin-consumer schema

On 1/12/26 5:14 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 09/01/2026 15:11, Ivan Vecera wrote:
>>>>> +  Common properties for devices that require connection to DPLL
>>>>> (Digital Phase
>>>>> +  Locked Loop) pins for frequency synchronization (e.g. SyncE).
>>>>> +
>>>>> +properties:
>>>>> +  dpll-pins:
>>>>> +    $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/phandle-array
>>>>> +    description:
>>>>> +      List of phandles to the DPLL pin nodes connected to this device.
>>>>> +
>>>>> +  dpll-pin-names:
>>>>> +    $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/string-array
>>>>> +    description:
>>>>> +      Names for the DPLL pins defined in 'dpll-pins', in the same
>>>>> order.
>>>>> +
>>>>> +dependencies:
>>>>> +  dpll-pin-names: [ dpll-pins ]
>>>>
>>>> Binding should go to dtschema. See also commit
>>>> 3282a891060aace02e3eed4789739768060cea32 in dtschema or other examples
>>>> how to add new provider/consumer properties.
>>
>> Quick questions... if the dpll pin consumer properties schema should go
>> to dtschema...
>>
>> 1) Should I remove this patch from this series? So this schema won't be
>>      a part of kernel
> 
> Yes.

OK, will remove this patch from the series and create PR against
dtschema and ...

>> 2) dtschema does not contain dpll-device and dpll-pin schemas now, I
> 
> The provider, so the #foo-cells should be in dtschema as well.

... include dpll.yaml and dpll-pin.yaml as well.

>>      expect they should be added as well... or? I'm asking because there
>>      is also e.g. hwlock-consumer.yaml in dtschema but no hwlock
> 
> hwlock-cells are missing, probably due to licensing.

and I will also include '#dpll-pin-cells', as we cannot theoretically
rule out its usage in the future.

Thanks,
Ivan