| 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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 3 May 2024 17:14:16 -0400 From: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com> To: Easwar Hariharan <eahariha@...ux.microsoft.com> CC: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>, Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>, Tvrtko Ursulin <tursulin@...ulin.net>, David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>, "Zhenyu Wang" <zhenyuw@...ux.intel.com>, Zhi Wang <zhi.wang.linux@...il.com>, "open list:INTEL DRM DISPLAY FOR XE AND I915 DRIVERS" <intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>, "open list:INTEL DRM DISPLAY FOR XE AND I915 DRIVERS" <intel-xe@...ts.freedesktop.org>, "open list:DRM DRIVERS" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>, open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "open list:INTEL GVT-g DRIVERS (Intel GPU Virtualization)" <intel-gvt-dev@...ts.freedesktop.org>, Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>, "open list:RADEON and AMDGPU DRM DRIVERS" <amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org>, "open list:DRM DRIVER FOR NVIDIA GEFORCE/QUADRO GPUS" <nouveau@...ts.freedesktop.org>, "open list:I2C SUBSYSTEM HOST DRIVERS" <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>, "open list:BTTV VIDEO4LINUX DRIVER" <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>, "open list:FRAMEBUFFER LAYER" <linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org>, Zhi Wang <zhiwang@...nel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/12] drm/i915: Make I2C terminology more inclusive On Fri, May 03, 2024 at 02:04:15PM -0700, Easwar Hariharan wrote: > On 5/3/2024 12:34 PM, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > > On Fri, May 03, 2024 at 06:13:24PM +0000, Easwar Hariharan wrote: > >> I2C v7, SMBus 3.2, and I3C 1.1.1 specifications have replaced "master/slave" > >> with more appropriate terms. Inspired by and following on to Wolfram's > >> series to fix drivers/i2c/[1], fix the terminology for users of > >> I2C_ALGOBIT bitbanging interface, now that the approved verbiage exists > >> in the specification. > >> > >> Compile tested, no functionality changes intended > >> > >> [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240322132619.6389-1-wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com/ > >> > >> Reviewed-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com> > >> Acked-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com> > > > > It looks like the ack is not needed since we are merging this through > > drm-intel-next. But I'm planing to merge this only after seeing the > > main drivers/i2c accepting the new terminology. So we don't have a > > risk of that getting push back and new names there and we having > > to rename it once again. > > Just to be explicit, did you want me to remove the Acked-by in v3, or will you when you pull > the patch into drm-intel-next? > > > > > (more below) > > > >> Acked-by: Zhi Wang <zhiwang@...nel.org> > >> Signed-off-by: Easwar Hariharan <eahariha@...ux.microsoft.com> > > > > Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...el.com> > > > > Jani, what bits were you concerned that were not necessarily i2c? > > I believe although not necessarily/directly i2c, I believe they > > are related and could benefit from the massive single shot renable. > > or do you have any better split to suggest here? > > > > (more below) > > > >> --- > >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/dvo_ch7017.c | 14 ++++----- > >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/dvo_ch7xxx.c | 18 +++++------ > >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/dvo_ivch.c | 16 +++++----- > >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/dvo_ns2501.c | 18 +++++------ > >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/dvo_sil164.c | 18 +++++------ > >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/dvo_tfp410.c | 18 +++++------ > >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_bios.c | 22 +++++++------- > >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c | 2 +- > >> .../gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_display_core.h | 2 +- > >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dsi.h | 2 +- > >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dsi_vbt.c | 20 ++++++------- > >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dvo.c | 14 ++++----- > >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dvo_dev.h | 2 +- > >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_gmbus.c | 4 +-- > >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_sdvo.c | 30 +++++++++---------- > >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_vbt_defs.h | 4 +-- > >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/edid.c | 28 ++++++++--------- > >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/edid.h | 4 +-- > >> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gvt/opregion.c | 2 +- > >> 19 files changed, 119 insertions(+), 119 deletions(-) > >> > > <snip> > > >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c > >> index c17462b4c2ac..64db211148a8 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c > >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_ddi.c > >> @@ -4332,7 +4332,7 @@ static int intel_ddi_compute_config_late(struct intel_encoder *encoder, > >> connector->tile_group->id); > >> > >> /* > >> - * EDP Transcoders cannot be ensalved > >> + * EDP Transcoders cannot be slaves > > > > ^ here > > perhaps you meant 'targeted' ? > > > >> * make them a master always when present > > <snip> > > This is not actually I2C related as far as I could tell when I was making the change, so this was more of a typo fix. > > If we want to improve this, a quick check with the eDP v1.5a spec suggests using primary/secondary instead, > though in a global fashion rather than specifically for eDP transcoders. There is also source/sink terminology > in the spec related to DP encoders. > > Which would be a more acceptable change here? hmmm probably better to split the patches and align with the spec naming where it applies. and with i2c name where it applies. > > Thanks, > Easwar
Powered by blists - more mailing lists