linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: input: Goodix SPI HID Touchscreen

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: <CAL_JsqLwOekE1mz+3g8NTE3o4GhE9PWwR1Jfk_tL0RYKQmCg-A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2024 10:58:53 -0500
From: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Cc: Charles Wang <charles.goodix@...il.com>, dmitry.torokhov@...il.com, 
	hbarnor@...omium.org, conor.dooley@...rochip.com, jikos@...nel.org, 
	bentiss@...nel.org, linux-input@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: input: Goodix SPI HID Touchscreen

On Fri, Oct 25, 2024 at 10:29 AM Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org> wrote:
>
> Charles,
>
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2024 at 5:03 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > > +properties:
> > > +  compatible:
> > > +    enum:
> > > +      - goodix,gt7986u-spi
> >
> > Compatible is already documented and nothing here explains why we should
> > spi variant.
> >
> > > +
> > > +  reg:
> > > +    maxItems: 1
> > > +
> > > +  interrupts:
> > > +    maxItems: 1
> > > +
> > > +  reset-gpios:
> > > +    maxItems: 1
> > > +
> > > +  goodix,hid-report-addr:
> >
> > I do not see this patch addressing previous review. Sending something
> > like this as v1 after long discussions also does not help.
>
> Krzysztof is right that it's better to wait until we get consensus on
> the previous discussion before sending a new patch. I know you were
> just trying to help move things forward, but because of the way the
> email workflow works, sending a new version tends to fork the
> discussion into two threads and adds confusion.
>
> I know Krzysztof and Rob have been silent during our recent
> discussion, but it's also a long discussion. I've been assuming that
> they will take some time to digest and reply in a little bit. If they
> didn't, IMO it would have been reasonable to explicitly ask them for
> feedback in the other thread after giving a bit of time.

If the firmware creates fundamentally different interfaces, then
different compatibles makes sense. If the same driver handles both bus
interfaces, then 1 compatible should be fine. The addition of '-spi'
to the compatible doesn't give any indication of a different
programming model. I wouldn't care except for folks who will see it
and just copy it when their only difference is the bus interface and
we get to have the same discussion all over again. So if appending
'-spi' is the only thing you can come up with, make it abundantly
clear so that others don't blindly copy it. The commit msg is useful
for convincing us, but not for that purpose.

Rob