linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/19] Add initial support for QCS8300

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]

Message-ID: <3878b8e1-00c5-4761-bb1f-c9aa853ec501@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2024 13:33:37 +0200
From: Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>
To: Jingyi Wang <quic_jingyw@...cinc.com>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>, Bjorn Andersson
 <andersson@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>
Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>,
 Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, Xin Liu <quic_liuxin@...cinc.com>,
 Tingguo Cheng <quic_tingguoc@...cinc.com>,
 Zhenhua Huang <quic_zhenhuah@...cinc.com>,
 Kyle Deng <quic_chunkaid@...cinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/19] Add initial support for QCS8300

On 5.09.2024 7:08 AM, Jingyi Wang wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof,
> 
> On 9/4/2024 6:19 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 04/09/2024 11:34, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 04/09/2024 10:33, Jingyi Wang wrote:
>>>> Add initial support for QCS8300 SoC and QCS8300 RIDE board.
>>>>
>>>> This revision brings support for:
>>>> - CPUs with cpu idle
>>>> - interrupt-controller with PDC wakeup support
>>>> - gcc
>>>> - TLMM
>>>> - interconnect
>>>> - qup with uart
>>>> - smmu
>>>> - pmic
>>>> - ufs
>>>> - ipcc
>>>> - sram
>>>> - remoteprocs including ADSP,CDSP and GPDSP
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Jingyi Wang <quic_jingyw@...cinc.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> patch series organized as:
>>>> - 1-2: remoteproc binding and driver
>>>> - 3-5: ufs binding and driver
>>>> - 6-7: rpmhpd binding and driver
>>>> - 8-15: bindings for other components found on the SoC
>>>
>>> Limit your CC list. I found like 8 unnecessary addresses for already
>>> huge Cc list. Or organize your patches per subsystem, as we usually expect.
>>>
>>>> - 16-19: changes to support the device tree
>>>>
>>>> dependencies:
>>>> tlmm: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20240819064933.1778204-1-quic_jingyw@quicinc.com/
>>>> gcc: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240820-qcs8300-gcc-v1-0-d81720517a82@quicinc.com/
>>>> interconnect: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20240827151622.305-1-quic_rlaggysh@quicinc.com/
>>>
>>> Why? UFS cannot depend on pinctrl for example.
>>>
>>> This blocks testing and merging.
>>>
>>> Please organize properly (so decouple) your patches, so that there is no
>>> fake dependency.
>>
>> Let me also add here one more thought. That's like fourth or fifth
>> QCS/SA patchset last two weeks from Qualcomm and they repeat the same
>> mistakes. Not correctly organized, huge cc list, same problems with
>> bindings or drivers.
>>
>> I am giving much more comments to fix than review/ack tags.
>>
>> I am not going to review this. I will also slow down with reviewing
>> other Qualcomm patches. Why? Because you post simultaneously, apparently
>> you do not learn from other review, so I have to keep repeating the same.
>>
>> I am overwhelmed with this, so please expect two week review time from me.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Krzysztof
>>
> The CC list is generated from B4 tool, however, thanks for your advice and we
> will decouple the changes to avoid this. And could you please help us to confirm
> the better way to handle binding changes which just add one compatible, should
> it be submitted as a single patch or submmitted together with dts patch series?

The tool did its job here, it's just that this series is very long and a ton
of people ended up being involved due to bindings oneliners

Konrad