linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 5/5] arm64: dts: qcom: Add Lenovo ThinkBook 16 G7 QOY device tree

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: <CAF6AEGsTtEA=So1CDhvg8H5+Z-RJ9OnhgSzDoa+zkWSPO3cvnA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 28 May 2025 09:50:37 -0700
From: Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>
To: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com>
Cc: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>, 
	Aleksandrs Vinarskis <alex.vinarskis@...il.com>, jens.glathe@...schoolsolutions.biz, 
	Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>, Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>, 
	Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, 
	Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, 
	Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>, Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>, 
	Jessica Zhang <quic_jesszhan@...cinc.com>, 
	Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>, Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>, 
	Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>, David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, Simona Vetter <simona@...ll.ch>, 
	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@...nel.org>, 
	linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/5] arm64: dts: qcom: Add Lenovo ThinkBook 16 G7 QOY
 device tree

On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 11:18 AM Dmitry Baryshkov
<dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 12:55:06PM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> > On 5/26/25 5:28 PM, Rob Clark wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 26, 2025 at 1:36 AM Dmitry Baryshkov
> > > <dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On Sun, May 25, 2025 at 09:43:36PM +0200, Aleksandrs Vinarskis wrote:
> > >>> On Sun, 25 May 2025 at 15:33, Dmitry Baryshkov
> > >>> <dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com> wrote:
> > >>>>
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > >> Yes, please. Don't set okay status for the GPU until it gets enabled.
> > >
> > > Drive-by: Shouldn't the dtb describe the hw and not the state of the
> > > linux kernel's support for the hw?  Ie. if bad things happen if we
> > > describe hw which is missing driver support, shouldn't we fix that in
> > > the driver.
> > >
> > > (In the case of the GPU there is the slight wrinkle that we don't have
> > > a gpu-id yet so there is no compatible in the dtb yet.)
> >
> > My two cents are that it's okay to enable it, at least in this case..
>
> That would most likely make display unavailable as DPU driver uses GPU
> as one of the components.

Hmm, perhaps we should allow the gpu to probe, but just fail to create
priv->gpu, similarly to how we handle missing firmware?

BR,
-R