linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/5] drm/bridge: Add drm_bridge_find_by

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: <c999fed3-b6bd-4499-b508-cf524372fbdb@linux.dev>
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2024 16:01:28 +0800
From: Sui Jingfeng <sui.jingfeng@...ux.dev>
To: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
Cc: David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
 Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>,
 Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>, Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
 Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] drm/bridge: Add drm_bridge_find_by_fwnode() helper

Hi,

Thanks a lot for your review :-)

On 2024/1/23 09:17, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Hi Sui,
>
> Thank you for the patch.
>
> On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 12:32:16AM +0800, Sui Jingfeng wrote:
>> Because ACPI based systems only has the fwnode associated, the of_node
>> member of struct device is NULL. To order to move things forward, we add
>> drm_bridge_find_by_fwnode() to extend the support.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sui Jingfeng <sui.jingfeng@...ux.dev>
> Could we switch completely to fwnode, instead of maintaining the fwnode
> and OF options side-by-side ?

The side-by-side approach allow us to migrate smoothly,
the main consideration is that the OF approach has been
works very well, it is flexible and very successful in
the embedded world.

It seems that the fwnode API could NOT replace the OF
options completely. For example, the'of_device_id' and 'of_match_table' related things are always there, there
are large well-established helpers and subroutines and
already formed as a standard. Some part of it may suffer
from backward compatibility problems.

So I want to leave some space to other programmers.
Maybe there are other programmers who feel that using
OF alone is enough for a specific problem(domain).