linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] drm/msm/dp: Add DP compliance tests on Snapdragon Chipsets

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]

Message-ID: <9fa6328419fa5ddcca856d3c505394f8@codeaurora.org>
Date:   Tue, 21 Jul 2020 14:15:35 -0700
From:   khsieh@...eaurora.org
To:     Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>
Cc:     Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>, Sean Paul <sean@...rly.run>,
        Tanmay Shah <tanmay@...eaurora.org>,
        Abhinav Kumar <abhinavk@...eaurora.org>,
        aravindh@...eaurora.org, David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
        dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        freedreno <freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/msm/dp: Add DP compliance tests on Snapdragon
 Chipsets

On 2020-07-20 19:57, Rob Clark wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 20, 2020 at 4:32 PM Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org> 
> wrote:
>> 
>> Quoting khsieh@...eaurora.org (2020-07-20 15:48:13)
>> > On 2020-07-20 13:18, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>> > > Quoting Kuogee Hsieh (2020-07-07 11:41:25)
>> > >>  drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_power.c           |  32 +-
>> > >>  drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_power.h           |   1 +
>> > >>  drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dp/dp_reg.h             |   1 +
>> > >>  17 files changed, 861 insertions(+), 424 deletions(-)
>> > >
>> > > It seems to spread various changes throughout the DP bits and only has
>> > > a
>> > > short description about what's changing. Given that the series above
>> > > isn't merged it would be better to get rid of this change and make the
>> > > changes in the patches that introduce these files.
>> > >
>> >
>> > Yes, the base DP driver is not yet merged as its still in reviews and
>> > has been for a while.
>> > While it is being reviewed, different developers are working on
>> > different aspects of DP such as base DP driver, DP compliance, audio etc
>> > to keep things going in parallel.
>> > To maintain the authorship of the different developers, we prefer having
>> > them as separate changes and not merge them.
>> > We can make all these changes as part of the same series if that shall
>> > help to keep things together but would prefer the changes themselves to
>> > be separate.
>> > Please consider this and let us know if that works.
>> >
>> 
>> I'm not the maintainer here so it's not really up to me, but this is 
>> why
>> we have the Co-developed-by tag, to show that multiple people worked 
>> on
>> some patch. The patch is supposed to logically stand on its own
>> regardless of how many people worked on it. Authorship is a single
>> person but the Co-developed-by tag helps express that more than one
>> person is the actual author of the patch. Can you use that tag instead
>> and then squash this into the other DP patches?
> 
> The dpu mega-patches are hard enough to review already.. I'd really
> appreciated it if the dpu dev's sort out some way to squash later
> fixups into earlier patches
> 
> BR,
> -R
as per discussion on IRC, I have separated the parts of this change 
which are
unrelated to compliance and we have merged it to the base DP driver and 
added
the Co-developed-by tag there. Since this change adds supports for DP 
compliance
on MSM chipsets which is a new feature and not fixes to the base driver, 
we will
prefer to have this as a separate change as it will make it easier for 
you to
review it instead of continuing to expand the base DP driver