linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] Convert Microchip's HLCDC Text based DT bindings to JSON schema

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2024 14:23:56 +0100
From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>
To: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Dharma Balasubiramani <dharma.b@...rochip.com>
Cc: linux4microchip@...rochip.com, linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org,
	alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
	nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com, conor.dooley@...rochip.com,
	thierry.reding@...il.com, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org,
	claudiu.beznea@...on.dev, airlied@...il.com, lee@...nel.org,
	Dharma Balasubiramani <dharma.b@...rochip.com>,
	u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	conor+dt@...nel.org, tzimmermann@...e.de, mripard@...nel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, bbrezillon@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, daniel@...ll.ch
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] Convert Microchip's HLCDC Text based DT bindings
 to JSON schema

Hi Dharma & Rob.

> > To make the DT binding backward compatible you likely need to add a few
> > compatible that otherwise would have been left out - but that should do
> > the trick.
> > 
> > The current atmel hlcdc driver that is split in three is IMO an
> > over-engineering, and the driver could benefit merging it all in one.
> > And the binding should not prevent this.
> 
> I agree on all this, but a conversion is not really the time to redesign 
> things. Trust me, I've wanted to on lots of conversions. It should be 
> possible to simplify the driver side while keeping the DT as-is. Just 
> make the display driver bind to the MFD node instead. After that, then 
> one could look at flattening everything to 1 node.

Understood and thinking a bit about it fully agreed as well.
Dharma - please see my comments only as ideas for the future, and
ignore them in this fine rewrite you do.

	Sam