linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/6] media: dt-bindings: Document SC8280XP/SM8350 Venus

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, 7 Aug 2023 20:05:17 +0100
From:   Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>
To:     Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
        Stanimir Varbanov <stanimir.k.varbanov@...il.com>,
        Vikash Garodia <quic_vgarodia@...cinc.com>,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>
Cc:     Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@...ainline.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>,
        linux-media@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] media: dt-bindings: Document SC8280XP/SM8350 Venus

On 07/08/2023 19:55, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> On 7.08.2023 20:49, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
>> On 07/08/2023 19:45, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>>> That can be taken care of with match data.
>>>
>>> Konrad
>>
>> Well perhaps.
>>
>> I'm just sticking my oar in, to elucidate.
>>
>> The compat sub-nodes aren't just a random choice with no logic. They exist to select between what you assign the blocks to be, encoder, decoder or any admixture thereof.
>>
>> A functionality we want to maintain.
> Surely something like a modparam would be more suitable here?
> 
> Konrad

Hmm.

Well from earlier in the thread the question "why do we have these 
compat strings" is because we can have any combination of 
encoder/decoder assigned.

If there's a cogent argument _still_ to be made to transition to some 
new way of assignment then fine so long as we don't break that basic 
flexibility.

Though my own €0.02 is that a module parameter is more of a PITA than a 
compat string.

OTOH I could make the argument, that the high probability is most people 
- probably all, just instantiate a single encoder and decoder and aren't 
aware of or using the inbuilt flexibility.

@stan probably has the right idea what to do.

---
bod