Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] dt-bindings: soc: qcom: eud: Update compatible strings for eud

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 07/08/2024 20:32, Melody Olvera wrote:
> The EUD can more accurately be divided into two types; a secure type
> which requires that certain registers be updated via scm call and a
> nonsecure type which must access registers nonsecurely. Thus, change
> the compatible strings to reflect secure and nonsecure eud usage.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/qcom,eud.yaml | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/qcom,eud.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/qcom,eud.yaml
> index f2c5ec7e6437..476f92768610 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/qcom,eud.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/soc/qcom/qcom,eud.yaml
> @@ -17,8 +17,8 @@ properties:
>    compatible:
>      items:
>        - enum:
> -          - qcom,sc7280-eud
> -      - const: qcom,eud
> +          - qcom,secure-eud
> +          - qcom,eud

Commit msg did not explain me why DT bindings rules are avoided here and
you drop existing SoC specific compatible.

This really does not look like having any sense at all, I cannot come up
with logic behind dropping existing users. You could deprecate it, but
then why exactly this device should have exception from generic bindings
rule?


Best regards,
Krzysztof





[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [Linux for Sparc]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux