linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 2/2] dt-bindings: add binding documentation for Allwinner CSI

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, 19 Jul 2017 09:33:49 +0300
From:   Baruch Siach <baruch@...s.co.il>
To:     Yong <yong.deng@...ewell.com>
Cc:     mchehab@...nel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
        maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com, wens@...e.org,
        hans.verkuil@...co.com, peter.griffin@...aro.org,
        hugues.fruchet@...com, krzk@...nel.org, bparrot@...com,
        arnd@...db.de, jean-christophe.trotin@...com,
        benjamin.gaignard@...aro.org, tiffany.lin@...iatek.com,
        kamil@...as.org, kieran+renesas@...uared.org.uk,
        andrew-ct.chen@...iatek.com, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/2] dt-bindings: add binding documentation for
 Allwinner CSI

Hi Yong,

On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 02:21:20PM +0800, Yong wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Jul 2017 07:49:23 +0300
> Baruch Siach <baruch@...s.co.il> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 09:22:49AM +0800, Yong wrote:
> > > I am waiting for more comments for the sunxi-csi.h. It's pleasure if
> > > you have any suggestions about it.
> > 
> > You mean sunxi_csi.h, right?
> 
> Yes. My spelling mistake.
> 
> > Why do you need the sunxi_csi_ops indirection? Do you expect to add 
> > alternative implementations of these ops at some point?
> 
> I want to seperate the sunxi_video.c and sunxi_csi_v3s.c. 
> sunxi_csi_v3s.c is Soc specific. Maybe there will be sunxi_csi_r40.c
> in the futrue. But the sunxi_video.c and sunxi_csi.c are common.

I'd say it is a premature optimization. The file separation is fine, IMO, but 
the added csi_ops indirection makes the code less readable. Someone with 
access to R40 hardware with CSI setup would be a better position to abstract 
the platform specific code.

But I'd defer to the media maintainers on that.

Thanks,
baruch

-- 
     http://baruch.siach.name/blog/                  ~. .~   Tk Open Systems
=}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{=
   - baruch@...s.co.il - tel: +972.2.679.5364, http://www.tkos.co.il -