[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAGngYiVU5Udm6zUzrJPNF-V+uchhiv0-tWbUzb+_aSYVF=Dpug@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 09:08:34 -0500
From: Sven Van Asbroeck <thesven73@...il.com>
To: "H. Nikolaus Schaller" <hns@...delico.com>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
Discussions about the Letux Kernel
<letux-kernel@...nphoenux.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] SPI broken for SPI based panel drivers
On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 8:36 AM H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@...delico.com> wrote:
>
> Well I only complain because you wrote that you knew that it may
> break something else. So it is known to induces a regression.
We knew that it would fix an important, common problem, but
we also knew that there is always a possibility of breaking
something else when making a change to the core.
>
> Maybe printing a "please check your spi setup" in spi_setup() with
> a comment hinting at your patch would have saved me a lot of time.
>
You could ask the maintainer for such a policy, but I fear that soon
the code would emit too many "please check" messages.
>
> Well, I am sort of maintainer of a vendor kernel that tries to
> follow linus/master and fix things before we release an LTS.
Makes sense, I understand your situation better now.
>
> Anyways, there is still time until v5.10.0 to fix it better than by
> a revert.
When we find a fix, it'll have a Fixes: tag, which means it'll
automatically be applied to every supported kernel, including
v5.10 even if already released.
>
> Hope that you have an idea soon. I am happy to test any suggestions/patches/alternatives
> better than a simple revert.
>
Thank you, that's great. I may come back with a few suggestions
for you to test this week.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists