linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] media: dt-bindings: qcom,sm8550-iris: Do not reference legacy venus properties

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: <99820dc6-942a-4aca-911e-cc68834e41f0@oss.qualcomm.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2025 15:10:52 +0200
From: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
        Vikash Garodia <quic_vgarodia@...cinc.com>,
        Mukesh Ojha <mukesh.ojha@....qualcomm.com>
Cc: Dikshita Agarwal <quic_dikshita@...cinc.com>,
        Abhinav Kumar <abhinav.kumar@...ux.dev>,
        Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
        Conor Dooley
 <conor+dt@...nel.org>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-media@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] media: dt-bindings: qcom,sm8550-iris: Do not reference
 legacy venus properties

On 8/28/25 3:57 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 28/08/2025 15:49, Vikash Garodia wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Whether removing will not break any ABI as initial binding enables the IRIS
>>>> related code to use video-firmware, now we are removing it.
>>>> I believe, removing binding always break ABI ? or is it depend on driver
>>>> code not using it ?
>>>
>>> There is no single user of this, out of tree (I briefly checked) and
>>> in-tree, so there is no ABI impact. I am changing the documentation of
>>> the ABI, but there is no actual ABI break because impact is 0.
>>>
>>
>> My understanding here is that the interface "video-firmware" is already defined
>> in the binding. There could be possible out-of-tree users of it, might not be
> 
> There are no such.

I believe the confusion here comes from the requirement that was set out
for the iris driver to support existing (venus-supported) platforms without
binding alterations

Bindings for SM8550 Iris (as in, the hardware block) only came out with the
iris driver, so there was no legacy to support in this case

Konrad