On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 09:30:59AM +0200, Martin Cerveny wrote:
> Like A33 "sun4i-ss" has a difference, it give SHA1 digest
> directly in BE. So add new compatible.
>
> Tested-by: Martin Cerveny <[email protected]>
The Tested-by tag is for the other developpers. You're very much
expected to have tested your patch before contributing it.
> Signed-off-by: Martin Cerveny <[email protected]>
> ---
> .../bindings/crypto/allwinner,sun4i-a10-crypto.yaml | 5 ++++-
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/allwinner,sun4i-a10-crypto.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/allwinner,sun4i-a10-crypto.yaml
> index fc823572b..180efd13a 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/allwinner,sun4i-a10-crypto.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/allwinner,sun4i-a10-crypto.yaml
> @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@ properties:
> - const: allwinner,sun4i-a10-crypto
> - items:
> - const: allwinner,sun8i-a33-crypto
> + - const: allwinner,sun8i-v3s-crypto
If it's compatible with the A33, why do we need to introduce a new compatible?
>
> reg:
> maxItems: 1
> @@ -59,7 +60,9 @@ if:
> properties:
> compatible:
> contains:
> - const: allwinner,sun6i-a31-crypto
> + oneOf:
> + - const: allwinner,sun6i-a31-crypto
> + - const: allwinner,sun8i-v3s-crypto
I guess the A33 compatible should be on that list as well?
Maxime
On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 11:32:49AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 09:30:59AM +0200, Martin Cerveny wrote:
> > Like A33 "sun4i-ss" has a difference, it give SHA1 digest
> > directly in BE. So add new compatible.
> >
> > Tested-by: Martin Cerveny <[email protected]>
>
> The Tested-by tag is for the other developpers. You're very much
> expected to have tested your patch before contributing it.
>
> > Signed-off-by: Martin Cerveny <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > .../bindings/crypto/allwinner,sun4i-a10-crypto.yaml | 5 ++++-
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/allwinner,sun4i-a10-crypto.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/allwinner,sun4i-a10-crypto.yaml
> > index fc823572b..180efd13a 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/allwinner,sun4i-a10-crypto.yaml
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/allwinner,sun4i-a10-crypto.yaml
> > @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@ properties:
> > - const: allwinner,sun4i-a10-crypto
> > - items:
> > - const: allwinner,sun8i-a33-crypto
> > + - const: allwinner,sun8i-v3s-crypto
>
> If it's compatible with the A33, why do we need to introduce a new compatible?
>
> >
> > reg:
> > maxItems: 1
> > @@ -59,7 +60,9 @@ if:
> > properties:
> > compatible:
> > contains:
> > - const: allwinner,sun6i-a31-crypto
> > + oneOf:
> > + - const: allwinner,sun6i-a31-crypto
> > + - const: allwinner,sun8i-v3s-crypto
>
> I guess the A33 compatible should be on that list as well?
This is the list of "need reset".
So we cannot use allwinner,sun8i-a33-crypto
Probably this explanation should be in the commit message.
Regards
On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 12:57:19PM +0200, Corentin Labbe wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 11:32:49AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 09:30:59AM +0200, Martin Cerveny wrote:
> > > Like A33 "sun4i-ss" has a difference, it give SHA1 digest
> > > directly in BE. So add new compatible.
> > >
> > > Tested-by: Martin Cerveny <[email protected]>
> >
> > The Tested-by tag is for the other developpers. You're very much
> > expected to have tested your patch before contributing it.
> >
> > > Signed-off-by: Martin Cerveny <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > > .../bindings/crypto/allwinner,sun4i-a10-crypto.yaml | 5 ++++-
> > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/allwinner,sun4i-a10-crypto.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/allwinner,sun4i-a10-crypto.yaml
> > > index fc823572b..180efd13a 100644
> > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/allwinner,sun4i-a10-crypto.yaml
> > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/allwinner,sun4i-a10-crypto.yaml
> > > @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@ properties:
> > > - const: allwinner,sun4i-a10-crypto
> > > - items:
> > > - const: allwinner,sun8i-a33-crypto
> > > + - const: allwinner,sun8i-v3s-crypto
> >
> > If it's compatible with the A33, why do we need to introduce a new compatible?
> >
> > >
> > > reg:
> > > maxItems: 1
> > > @@ -59,7 +60,9 @@ if:
> > > properties:
> > > compatible:
> > > contains:
> > > - const: allwinner,sun6i-a31-crypto
> > > + oneOf:
> > > + - const: allwinner,sun6i-a31-crypto
> > > + - const: allwinner,sun8i-v3s-crypto
> >
> > I guess the A33 compatible should be on that list as well?
>
> This is the list of "need reset".
> So we cannot use allwinner,sun8i-a33-crypto
> Probably this explanation should be in the commit message.
But the A33 has a reset in the DTSI
Maxime