[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201201153343.GJ5239@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 15:33:43 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Sven Van Asbroeck <thesven73@...il.com>
Cc: "H. Nikolaus Schaller" <hns@...delico.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.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 01, 2020 at 09:08:34AM -0500, Sven Van Asbroeck wrote:
> 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.
It's worth pointing out that this is an exceptionally fragile area of
the code thanks to some regrettable historical decisions with regard to
how GPIOs are managed so this assessment is based on repeated past
experiences with changes that look sensible, fix real problems for real
systems and yet cause problems to crop up elsewhere due to unforseen
interactions elsewhere. Eventually we'll shake out all these issues and
end up with something that's more understandable and hence managable but
clearly we aren't there yet.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists