linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] media: vgxy61: Add legacy compatible string

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <bd2aa638-e30c-4011-925b-4d922fe28f61@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2024 22:54:35 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Benjamin Mugnier <benjamin.mugnier@...s.st.com>,
 Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>, Rob Herring
 <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
 Sylvain Petinot <sylvain.petinot@...s.st.com>,
 Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
 linux-media@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] media: vgxy61: Add legacy compatible string

On 11/06/2024 15:07, Benjamin Mugnier wrote:
> 
>>>
>>> Will this be ok for you ? Tell me your thoughts.
>>
>> It seems you are making some changes assuming there is some error to be
>> fixed, but there is none. Compatible is just some unique string, so the
>> original compatible, although unfortunate, is okay and must not be
>> changed. I already explained that adding new compatibles for such cases
>> is only for exceptions. Is this exception? No. You provided no rationale
>> to make it an exception.
> 
> Thank you. I think I failed to provide some details :
> 
> The change is motivated by a will of consistency in naming.

Consistency is a preference and not really a reason here. Could be named
"st,yellow-elephant" and it would be kind of fine...

> As you correctly mentioned in the vd56g3 series [1], bindings should be
> 'vendor,device'. This will be changed for the vd56g3 series v3 by

Yeah, but that ship has sailed. Where is the answer about all the users?
You pick pieces of my arguments and ignore some parts of it.

None of this is suitable for exception. Style or preference is not
argument for exception.

> Sylvain, but the vgxy61 binding is already badly named.
> We will then have these 2 bindings in the wild : st,vd56g3 and
> st,st-vgxy61, for very similar sensors. Hence the will to add a
> st,vgxy61 binding for consistency.

Nope.

> This also prepares the ground for new camera sensor drivers we plan to
> submit later on, and that will respect the st,device binding naming scheme.

Nope

> 
> Is it the correct way to go ?

Nope, sorry.

I already said this several times in this email thread - answers here
and in other emails. Now, again.

When I said about exceptions, I really meant exceptions, e.g. something
is broken or something never worked and has to be fixed. Style or
preference is not this case. No point to keep arguing how style is
important for you.


Best regards,
Krzysztof