linux-kernel - [RFC PATCH] drm/msm/dpu1: Add a common DPU1 compatible

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20220222012638.6650-1-konrad.dybcio@somainline.org>
Date:   Tue, 22 Feb 2022 02:26:37 +0100
From:   Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...ainline.org>
To:     ~postmarketos/upstreaming@...ts.sr.ht
Cc:     martin.botka@...ainline.org,
        angelogioacchino.delregno@...ainline.org,
        marijn.suijten@...ainline.org, jamipkettunen@...ainline.org,
        Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...ainline.org>,
        Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>, Sean Paul <sean@...rly.run>,
        Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@...cinc.com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
        Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Kalyan Thota <quic_kalyant@...cinc.com>,
        Krishna Manikandan <quic_mkrishn@...cinc.com>,
        Yangtao Li <tiny.windzz@...il.com>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH] drm/msm/dpu1: Add a common DPU1 compatible

There is *almost no reason* to keep separate compatibles for different
SoCs utilizing the DPU1 driver, as it checks the HW version at runtime.

Introduce a common compatible, while not removing the old ones to keep
old DT compatibility.

Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...ainline.org>
---
Bar some very very very unlikely edge cases (such as need for some random
quick being applied to one SoC from a family that shares DPU hw rev, but
not the others, there is little to no reason to keep adding compatibles
that don't mean anything.

If this change is cool, then the question about what to do with
dt-bindings arises...

 drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_kms.c | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_kms.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_kms.c
index 47fe11a84a77..335018542a3a 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_kms.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_kms.c
@@ -1348,6 +1348,9 @@ static const struct dev_pm_ops dpu_pm_ops = {
 };
 
 const struct of_device_id dpu_dt_match[] = {
+	{ .compatible = "qcom,dpu1" },
+
+	/* Legacy compatibles for old DTs */
 	{ .compatible = "qcom,sdm845-dpu", },
 	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7180-dpu", },
 	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7280-dpu", },
-- 
2.35.1