linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/8] drm/loongson: Introduce a drm bridge driver for it66121 HDMI transmitter

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]

Message-ID: <9926d2cf-5f92-4f4a-bc4d-423b07e38a3c@loongson.cn>
Date:   Mon, 30 Oct 2023 22:39:32 +0800
From:   Sui Jingfeng <suijingfeng@...ngson.cn>
To:     Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>
Cc:     Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
        Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] drm/loongson: Introduce a drm bridge driver for
 it66121 HDMI transmitter

Hi,


On 2023/10/30 21:39, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 09:25:50PM +0800, Sui Jingfeng wrote:
>> I think my approach provide a solution, while still keep the bridges drivers
>> to a modular at the same time. Despite simple, it indeed solve the problem.
>> It simple because of explicit control of the loading order by myself, not by
>> rely on the framework or something else (say component)
>>
>> It is not totally duplicating, I have rewrite part of them. You can compare
>> to see what I'm changed. It is just that it66162 was upstream-ed earlier than
>> our solution. But I also have write display drivers for lt8618 and lt8619
>> completely by myself.
>>
>> Even though our local drm bridges driver will not be able to enjoy the updates.
>> We will accept such a results(or pain). I can maintain our local drm bridges
>> drivers by myself. Sorry, on this technique point, we will not follow your idea.
>> I'm sure that my approach is toward to right direction for our device at now.
>> If someone invent a better solution to handle this problem, which make the
>> various drm bridges drivers usable out of box, then I will follow and cooperate
>> to test.
> As far as I'm concerned, the two options are either you reuse the
> already existing driver or this series isn't merged.

It's not that I don't want to use thealready existing display bridge driver, It is just that it is not 
suitable for non DT-based system to use. Our system using UEFI+ACPI, 
beside the I2C, there also have GPIO HPD interrupt hardware. ACPI-based system and DT-based system have different way to use(request) the hardware.
Can you feel my words?

If the variousdisplay bridge drivers are really ready to use, why I have to refuse?


> Ignoring what issue we raised and still merging your patch isn't on the
> table, sorry.
>
> Maxime