linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/panfrost: Merge some feature lists

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:   Thu, 13 Jan 2022 09:52:47 +0000
From:   Steven Price <steven.price@....com>
To:     Alyssa Rosenzweig <alyssa@...labora.com>
Cc:     Alyssa Rosenzweig <alyssa.rosenzweig@...labora.com>,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@...labora.com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/panfrost: Merge some feature lists

On 12/01/2022 19:20, Alyssa Rosenzweig wrote:
>>> Now that we only list features of interest to kernel space, lots of GPUs
>>> have the same feature bits. To cut down on the repetition in the file,
>>> merge feature lists that are identical between similar GPUs.
>>>
>>> Note that this leaves some unmerged identical Bifrost feature lists, as
>>> there are more features affecting Bifrost kernel space that we do not
>>> yet hanlde.
>>
>> NIT: s/hanlde/handle/ ;)
>>
>> Do you have any features in mind that we're missing? The list looks very
>> similar to the kbase one. And anyway it is simple enough to split again
>> if we need to.
> 
> Just IDVS group size. For some reason I thought there were more when I
> wrote that commit message. It's split to avoid churn in that patch.
> 
> Logically, this series should contain three patches, with the IDVS group
> size enablement patch at the end. That was the series I wrote and
> committed to disk. For review I split it out, since the feature clean-up
> can land now, while the (RFC) IDVS group size patch needs
> testing/benchmarking.
> 

Ah, of course! That makes perfect sense, but somehow I hadn't managed to
connect the two.

I've fixed the typo and pushed to drm-misc-next. And I'll wait for your
benchmarking on IDVS. Do I get a few minutes break before the Valhall
patches need reviewing? ;)

Thanks,

Steve