linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] arm64: dts: mediatek: add mt6765 support

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 12 Jul 2018 08:06:17 +0800
From:   Mars Cheng <mars.cheng@...iatek.com>
To:     Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>
CC:     Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        CC Hwang <cc.hwang@...iatek.com>,
        Loda Chou <loda.chou@...iatek.com>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        <wsd_upstream@...iatek.com>, <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] arm64: dts: mediatek: add mt6765 support

Hi Matthias

On Tue, 2018-07-10 at 12:52 +0200, Matthias Brugger wrote:
> 
> On 10/07/18 01:04, Mars Cheng wrote:
[...]

> > pmic/pwrap/i2c/rtc/kpd/spi/wdt/cqdma/auxadc/pwm/cmdq/disp. We have
> > dedicated owners to handle them and will cowork tightly with members to
> > make sure things happen in the following weeks.
> > 
> 
> Ok, so let's wait until pinctrl driver is submitted. I'd prefer if you could add
> the clk driver to this series. This way we can get rid of the dummy clocks in
> the device tree.
> 

Got it, I will submit this series with clk support in v5. and pinctrl
after that.

> > For previous chips, we did have no enough support after shell. It is due
> > to fast pace of smartphone SoC and other resource issues. We also know
> > that is no excuse so that we already confirmed owners and their
> > schedules for mt6765.
> > 
> > If there is any suggestion, please let us know.
> > 
> 
> I know that smartphone SoC is a fast paced business. Never the less I'm
> convinced that the basic building blocks won't change much from one version to
> another. And that mainline support for the previous version of your SoC will
> help you to get your new drivers faster upstream.
> 
> For me the best example is the mt7622 which got to a reasonable upstream support
> quite fast, thanks to a good foundation of mt7623 in mainline. I'd love to see
> that happen on the smartphone SoCs as well.
> 
> Not to mention that upstream support will help you internally when you have to
> rebase your BSP code-base to a new kernel version.
> 
> That said I think it is good news that you have already defined owner for the
> different devices and hope to see submissions for them in the near future :)
> As a suggestion I would say that upstream submission takes time and effort and
> it will help your engineers if they can allocate some time to do so. But that's
> most probably a management decision and all engineers know that management bases
> it's decision on some hard-to-understandable abbreviations like EBITDA etc. ;)
> 
> Best regards,
> Matthias

Thanks for your suggestions. We will try to catch up on this mission :-)