Re: [PATCH 2/3] dt-bindings: crypto: Convert Atmel TDES to yaml

[<Tudor.Ambarus@microchip.com>]

On 2/8/22 11:01, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
> 
> On 08/02/2022 05:04, Tudor.Ambarus@microchip.com wrote:
>> Hi, Krzysztof,
>>
>> On 2/7/22 18:04, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
>>>
>>> On 07/02/2022 04:24, Tudor Ambarus wrote:
>>>> Convert Atmel TDES documentation to yaml format. With the conversion the
>>>> clock and clock-names properties are made mandatory. The driver returns
>>>> -EINVAL if "tdes_clk" is not found, reflect that in the bindings and make
>>>> the clock and clock-names properties mandatory. Update the example to
>>>> better describe how one should define the dt node.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@microchip.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>  .../bindings/crypto/atmel,tdes.yaml           | 63 +++++++++++++++++++
>>>>  .../bindings/crypto/atmel-crypto.txt          | 23 -------
>>>>  2 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>>>>  create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/atmel,tdes.yaml
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/atmel,tdes.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/atmel,tdes.yaml
>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>> index 000000000000..7efa5e4acaa1
>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/crypto/atmel,tdes.yaml
>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,63 @@
>>>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
>>>> +%YAML 1.2
>>>> +---
>>>> +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/crypto/atmel,tdes.yaml#
>>>> +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml#
>>>> +
>>>> +title: Atmel Triple Data Encryption Standard (TDES) HW cryptographic accelerator
>>>> +
>>>> +maintainers:
>>>> +  - Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@microchip.com>
>>>> +
>>>> +properties:
>>>> +  compatible:
>>>> +    const: atmel,at91sam9g46-tdes
>>>> +
>>>
>>> Same comments as for patch 1 plus one new (also applying to previous
>>> one). You named the file quite generic "atmel,tdes" or "atmel,aes", but
>>> what if something newer comes for at91? Maybe name it instead
>>> "atmel,at91sam9-aes"?
>>>
>>
>> For historical reasons, the atmel-{aes,tdes,sha} drivers use their own
>> fixed compatible. The differentiation between the versions of the same IP
>> and their capabilities is done at run-time, by interrogating a version
>> register. Thus I expect that no new compatible will be added for neither of
>> these IPs.
> 
> I was not talking about compatibles. I was talking about file name. You
> called it "atmel,tdes" which is quite generic. If Microchip (not

oh yes, I misread your previous email.

> Atmel...) comes with a new type of AES/TDES/SHA block for new line of
> architectures, how are you going to name the bindings?
> 

"atmel,at91sam9g46-tdes" file name should be fine, thanks for the suggestion.

ta