linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v2 6/8] gpu: drm: tegra: Remove redundant host1x

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Wed, 5 Dec 2012 13:03:14 +0100
From:	Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
To:	Terje Bergström <tbergstrom@...dia.com>
Cc:	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...onic-design.de>,
	"linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
	Arto Merilainen <amerilainen@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 6/8] gpu: drm: tegra: Remove redundant host1x

On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 12:47 PM, Terje Bergström <tbergstrom@...dia.com> wrote:
> You're right in that binding to a sub-device is not a nice way. DRM
> framework just needs a "struct device" to bind to. exynos seems to solve
> this by introducing a virtual device and bind to that. I'm not sure if
> this is the best way, but worth considering?

Note that I'm not too happy about the fact that drm wants a struct
device to register a drm device. This all made a lot of sense back in
the days when drm drivers this this fancy shadow attaching to allow
drm to use a driver for rendering cooperatively with a fbdev driver.
Today there's not much reason for that anymore imo, and I'd welcome
patches to allow drivers to simply register a drm device (and remove
all the newer registration functions for usb/platform/whatever
drivers, moving the device handling into drivers). Note that it's a
bit work, since not-really-required abstraction (which was useful back
when the drm drivers have been shared with *BSD, but pointless now)
like the drm irq support needs to be moved away to a pci-dev legacy
thing only - it doesn't really buy a kms driver anything above&beyond
calling request_irq() itself.

So feel free to burn this down, I'll be happy to carry wood to the
pyre in the from of reviews (not much time for more right now ...).

Cheers, Daniel
-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
+41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/