netdev - Re: [PATCH] HPE BMC GXP SUPPORT

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]
Date:   Wed, 2 Feb 2022 22:21:25 +0100
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     "Verdun, Jean-Marie" <verdun@....com>
Cc:     "minyard@....org" <minyard@....org>,
        "Hawkins, Nick" <nick.hawkins@....com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>,
        Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
        Uwe Kleine-König 
        <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>, Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
        Amit Kucheria <amitk@...nel.org>,
        Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
        "soc@...nel.org" <soc@...nel.org>, Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
        Stanislav Jakubek <stano.jakubek@...il.com>,
        Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>,
        Hao Fang <fanghao11@...wei.com>,
        "Russell King (Oracle)" <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
        Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>,
        Wang Kefeng <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>,
        Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
        "dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
        "openipmi-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net" 
        <openipmi-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
        "linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-serial@...r.kernel.org" <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-spi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org" <linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] HPE BMC GXP SUPPORT

On Wed, Feb 2, 2022 at 7:14 PM Verdun, Jean-Marie <verdun@....com> wrote:
>
> > This is far too big for a single patch.  It needs to be broken into
> > functional chunks that can be reviewed individually.  Each driver and
> > each device tree change along with it's accompanying code need to be
> > done in individual patches.  The way it is it can't be reviewed in any
> > sane manner.
>
> > -corey
>
> Thanks for your feedback. We are getting a little bit lost here, as our plan was to submit initial
>
> - bindings
> - dts for SoC and 1 board
> - initial platform init code
>
> Then drivers code avoiding to send many dts updates which might complexify the
> review. We wanted to send all drivers code to relevant reviewers by tomorrow.
>
> So, what you are asking ( do not worry I am not trying to negotiate, I just want
> to avoid English misunderstandings as I am French) is to send per driver
>
> - binding
> - dts update
> - driver code
>
> For each driver through different submission (with each of them containing the
> 3 associated parts) ?
>
> What shall be the initial one in our case as we are introducing a platform ?
> An empty dts infrastructure and then we make it grow one step at a time ?

Ideally, what I prefer to see is a series of patches for all "essential" drivers
and the platform code that includes:

- one patch for each new binding
- one patch for each new driver
- one patch that hooks up arch/arm/mach-hpe/, MAINTAINERS
  and any other changes to arch/arm/ other than dts
- one patch that adds the initial .dts and .dtsi files, with all the
  devices added that have a valid binding, no need to split this
  up any further

This should include everything you need to boot into an initramfs
shell, typically cpu, serial, timer, clk, pinctrl,  gpio, irqchip. We will
merge these as a git branch in the soc tree.

In parallel, you can work with subsystem maintainers for the
"non-essential" drivers to review any other driver and binding,
e.g. drm/kms, network, i2c, pci, usb, etc. The patches for
the corresponding .dts additions also go through the soc tree,
but to make things simpler, you can send those in for a later
release.

          Arnd