On Wed, 2 Sep 2020, Corentin Labbe wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 01:40:15PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
>> 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
>>
>
>
> Oh right so I need to send a fix for that and Martin Cerveny could simply use the "allwinner,sun8i-a33-crypto" (and so keep only patch #1(DTS))
>
> Regards
>
What is "right" solution for DTSI ?
- compatible = "allwinner,sun8i-a33-crypto";
OR
- compatible = "allwinner,sun8i-v3s-crypto", "allwinner,sun8i-a33-crypto";
(but unimplemented "allwinner,sun8i-v3s-crypto")
Regards
On Sat, Sep 05, 2020 at 05:51:48PM +0200, Martin Cerveny wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2 Sep 2020, Corentin Labbe wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 01:40:15PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > > 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
> > >
> >
> >
> > Oh right so I need to send a fix for that and Martin Cerveny could simply use the "allwinner,sun8i-a33-crypto" (and so keep only patch #1(DTS))
> >
> > Regards
> >
>
> What is "right" solution for DTSI ?
> - compatible = "allwinner,sun8i-a33-crypto";
> OR
> - compatible = "allwinner,sun8i-v3s-crypto", "allwinner,sun8i-a33-crypto";
> (but unimplemented "allwinner,sun8i-v3s-crypto")
Generally, this one in case you have differences like bugs or features.
Rob