Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 21 Aug 2023 06:22:09 +0530 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/3] dt-bindings: crypto: qcom,prng: Add SM8450 | From | Om Prakash Singh <> |
| |
I meant first one. using "qcom,rng-ee".
I am looking for generic compatible string for all SoCs for which core clock can be optional, same as we have "qcom,prng-ee".
If we are using SoC name in compatible string, for each SoC support we need to update qcom,prng.yaml file.
Please suggest approach that we can followed!
Thanks, Om
On 8/19/2023 1:15 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 18/08/2023 18:17, Om Prakash Singh wrote: >> Instead of having SoC name "qcom,sm8450-prng-ee" we could use "qcom,rng-ee" as >> new IP core is not longer pseudo random number generator. so "prng" can be >> changed to "rng". Clock configuration is not needed on sm8550 as well. So it is >> better to use generic compatible string. > > I am not sure if I understand your point. You mean drop "p" in "prng" or > drop specific compatible? The first depends in the block - if it is > still pseudo. The second - why? That's contradictory to what is in the > guidelines and what we have been pushing for very long time. Going > against guidelines would require proper justification (and not some > usual justification "I don't need it", because we talked about this many > many times). One should not bring downstream poor practices to upstream, > but the other way. You should fix downstream code. > > Best regards, > Krzysztof >
| |