linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 3/6] drm/rockchip/dsi: correct Feedback divider setting

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 25 Oct 2017 18:09:47 -0700
From:   Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
To:     Sean Paul <seanpaul@...omium.org>
Cc:     Nickey Yang <nickey.yang@...k-chips.com>, mark.yao@...k-chips.com,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, heiko@...ech.de, mark.rutland@....com,
        airlied@...ux.ie, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org, hl@...k-chips.com,
        zyw@...k-chips.comg, xbl@...k-chips.com,
        Kristian Kristensen <hoegsberg@...il.com>,
        Archit Taneja <architt@...eaurora.org>,
        Philippe CORNU <philippe.cornu@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/6] drm/rockchip/dsi: correct Feedback divider setting

On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 03:57:19AM -0400, Sean Paul wrote:
> Archit asked a question about moving to
> dw-mipi-dsi

That question made me think though: this approach seems backwards. It
seems like someone did copy/paste/fork, and then we're asking the
authors of the original driver to un-fork? It seems like this should
happen the other way around -- those trying to support a new incarnation
should have looked to try to abstract the original driver for their
uses first.

IIUC, that's exactly what Rockchip did for much of their Analogix eDP
code -- they reworked the Exynos DP driver to split common Analogix code
from any Exynos-specific bits.

And actually, the current stuff in
drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/synopsys/dw-mipi-dsi.c is completely unused. It
exports some functions, but I see no users of it. Is that intended? Is
somebody already working on refactoring existing Rockchip code to use
this?

Brian