linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 02/10] dt-bindings: display: imx: Add i.MX8qxp Display Controller display engine

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: <20240708-mega-nautilus-of-champagne-cd4be6@houat>
Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2024 16:52:02 +0200
From: Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc: Liu Ying <victor.liu@....com>, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, 
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, imx@...ts.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, p.zabel@...gutronix.de, airlied@...il.com, daniel@...ll.ch, 
	maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com, tzimmermann@...e.de, robh@...nel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org, 
	conor+dt@...nel.org, shawnguo@...nel.org, s.hauer@...gutronix.de, 
	kernel@...gutronix.de, festevam@...il.com, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/10] dt-bindings: display: imx: Add i.MX8qxp Display
 Controller display engine

On Mon, Jul 08, 2024 at 04:04:21PM GMT, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 08/07/2024 08:40, Liu Ying wrote:
> >>> +
> >>> +  "^framegen@[0-9a-f]+$":
> >>> +    type: object
> >>> +    additionalProperties: true
> >>> +
> >>> +    properties:
> >>> +      compatible:
> >>> +        const: fsl,imx8qxp-dc-framegen
> >>> +
> >>> +  "^gammacor@[0-9a-f]+$":
> >>
> >> This looks like you are organizing bindings per your driver architecture.
> > 
> > As I mentioned in cover letter, this series addresses Maxime's
> > comment for the previous series - split the display controller
> > into multiple internal devices.  Maxime insisted on doing this.
> 
> But these are not separate devices. Look:
> 1. parent DC:
> reg = <0x56180000 0x40000>;
> 
> 2. child interrupt controller:
> reg = <0x56180040 0x60>;
> 
> That address is within parent.
> 
> 3. Then we go to things like:
> reg = <0x5618b400 0x14>, <0x5618b800 0x1c00>;
> 
> Still within parent's range and just few words in address range. That's
> a clear indication that you choose few registers and call it a "device".

That's never really been a metric though?

If not, one could just create a "soc" device node covering the entire
register map, and since it would overlap despite clearly defined
features, you would claim it's a single device?

Maxime

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (274 bytes)