linux-kernel - Re: [Freedreno] [PATCH 4/4] drm/msm/dp: Add support for SC8180x eDP

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:   Fri, 4 Jun 2021 21:56:09 +0000
From:   Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>
To:     Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        abhinavk@...eaurora.org
Cc:     Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>, Sean Paul <sean@...rly.run>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>, sbillaka@...eaurora.org,
        Tanmay Shah <tanmay@...eaurora.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
        freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        Chandan Uddaraju <chandanu@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [Freedreno] [PATCH 4/4] drm/msm/dp: Add support for SC8180x eDP

Quoting abhinavk@...eaurora.org (2021-05-28 16:40:32)
> On 2021-05-10 21:20, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> > The eDP controller found in SC8180x is at large compatible with the
> > current implementation, but has its register blocks at slightly
> > different offsets.
> >
> > Add the compatible and the new register layout.
> >
> I am not able to completely recall the history of why in the DP bindings
> we added DP register base as a big hunk and let catalog handle the
> submodule
> offsets.

I complained that there were many I/O regions for the DP block that
didn't seem to be changing between SoCs. Nobody objected to removing it
back then, but if the plan was to move things around later on then it
makes sense to split it out like it was done initially.

>
> I guess earlier that made sense because DP sub-block offsets were fixed.
> But if we plan to re-use the DP driver for eDP as well like this series,
> then maybe it might be
> better if this comes from device tree like the earlier version was
> planning to
>
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/dri-devel/patch/0101016ec6ddf446-e87ab1ce-5cbf-40a0-a0bb-cd0151cd577a-000000@us-west-2.amazonses.com/
>

Agreed.