linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v1 2/2] usb: host: add xhci-exynos to support Exynos SOCs

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:   Mon, 5 Dec 2022 16:53:42 +0900
From:   Jung Daehwan <dh10.jung@...sung.com>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
Cc:     Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@...ux.intel.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
        Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@...el.com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Colin Ian King <colin.i.king@...il.com>,
        Artur Bujdoso <artur.bujdoso@...il.com>,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
        Tomer Maimon <tmaimon77@...il.com>,
        "open list:USB SUBSYSTEM" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "moderated list:ARM/SAMSUNG S3C, S5P AND EXYNOS ARM ARCHITECTURES" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "open list:ARM/SAMSUNG S3C, S5P AND EXYNOS ARM ARCHITECTURES" 
        <linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, sc.suh@...sung.com,
        taehyun.cho@...sung.com, jh0801.jung@...sung.com,
        eomji.oh@...sung.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 2/2] usb: host: add xhci-exynos to support Exynos
 SOCs

On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 08:33:39AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 05/12/2022 03:34, Jung Daehwan wrote:
> 
> >>> Am I missing something here?
> >>
> >> Because it is not a driver for Exynos... it's a driver for wakelocks for
> >> their specific Android use-cases which the manufacturer ships for their
> >> Android devices. Due to Google GKI, they try to squeeze into upstream.
> >> But this is huge misconception what should go to upstream and Samsung
> >> does not want to keep discussing. They just send random patches and
> >> disappear...
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >> Krzysztof
> >>
> >>
> > 
> > No. It's driver for Exynos. Currently It only has wakelocks but I will
> > submit one by one. Please think as the first patch of exynos not
> > squeezed.
> 
> That's not how upstream kernel development works... Your code has
> nothing for Exynos. It's Android driver, not Exynos. If you say there is
> something for Exynos it must be visible here. Wakelocks are not relevant
> to Exynos, so after dropping them there would be empty stub in upstream
> kernel which obviously cannot be accepted.
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
> 
> 

Well, Exynos only uses wakelocks when I see mainline because it seems no
other driver use it. That's why I thought it could be a exynos specific.
Do you agree that if I put wakelocks into xhci platform driver?

Best Regards,
Jung Daehwan