From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 396C6C34964 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2019 20:36:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A032246E9 for ; Fri, 13 Dec 2019 20:36:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b="Wp+akN+C" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725948AbfLMLSb (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Dec 2019 06:18:31 -0500 Received: from lelv0142.ext.ti.com ([198.47.23.249]:38922 "EHLO lelv0142.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725937AbfLMLSb (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Dec 2019 06:18:31 -0500 Received: from lelv0266.itg.ti.com ([10.180.67.225]) by lelv0142.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id xBDBI4Pa039556; Fri, 13 Dec 2019 05:18:04 -0600 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1576235884; bh=H7BPSf+Mb4Osfrs3oWk3vvPWNcaDr0hYs41wVOdU79s=; h=Subject:To:CC:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=Wp+akN+CcgXl8k0vHjR4dwjBGuDVeh4X3WAB5FRsyF5hfMhTYPXdKjHbmY2w7CR1J xi2vOPEjg2DE7dk2MQLvcTfiZixyTkLnNsKsbGC6NJM6Kgm998BeeoUYZcXCOYJKF/ AAfAYPJLnphSdiiCC3fhJsOLqPu8Dac4P3SsteuY= Received: from DFLE103.ent.ti.com (dfle103.ent.ti.com [10.64.6.24]) by lelv0266.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id xBDBI3MO062693 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 13 Dec 2019 05:18:03 -0600 Received: from DFLE104.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.25) by DFLE103.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.24) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1847.3; Fri, 13 Dec 2019 05:18:03 -0600 Received: from fllv0040.itg.ti.com (10.64.41.20) by DFLE104.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.25) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1847.3 via Frontend Transport; Fri, 13 Dec 2019 05:18:03 -0600 Received: from [192.168.2.6] (ileax41-snat.itg.ti.com [10.172.224.153]) by fllv0040.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id xBDBI0au096481; Fri, 13 Dec 2019 05:18:00 -0600 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] MAINTAINERS: add entry for tidss To: Daniel Vetter , Jyri Sarha CC: , , , , , , , , , References: <09da3a37ca59bb45bef62f2335a191985363d393.1576158368.git.jsarha@ti.com> <20191213103024.GH624164@phenom.ffwll.local> From: Tomi Valkeinen Message-ID: <0acedebf-25d9-6ae2-1307-8f764af449af@ti.com> Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2019 13:17:59 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20191213103024.GH624164@phenom.ffwll.local> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 Sender: devicetree-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Hi Daniel, On 13/12/2019 12:30, Daniel Vetter wrote: >> +DRM DRIVERS FOR TI KEYSTONE >> +M: Jyri Sarha >> +M: Tomi Valkeinen >> +L: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org >> +S: Maintained >> +F: drivers/gpu/drm/tidss/ >> +F: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/ti/ti,k2g-dss.yaml >> +F: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/ti/ti,am65x-dss.yaml >> +F: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/ti/ti,j721e-dss.yaml >> +T: git git://anongit.freedesktop.org/drm/drm-misc > > Is the plan to also move other TI drivers over (like tilcdc) or just an > experiment to see what happens? Asking since if eventually omapdrm moves > that might be a bit much (or at least needs a discussion first). Hmm, yes, I think we should have a plan for these. tilcdc: small, old driver, and I don't see much changes for it. The HW is very different from the ones supported by omapdrm and tidss (the two of which have many commonalities). I think drm-misc is fine for tilcdc. omapdrm: big changes going on for now, but after the rewrite to get rid of omapdrm specific drivers is done, I expect the patch count to drop, as the HW is "legacy". tidss: the "new" driver, which should get most attention in the future (after omapdrm rewrite). All in all, sometimes there have been very few patches for many months, and then sometimes there's a big series. I haven't seen a need to have a maintained branch for omapdrm, as multiple people working on conflicting items has been very rare (there aren't that many people working on omapdrm). So I've picked patches to my private branch, which I have rebased as needed. And then I've either pushed via drm-misc if there's just a few patches, or sent a pull request if there's a lot. Is such a mixed model ok? I'm not sure how much is too much for drm-misc, but probably omapdrm and tidss combined (if pushing everything always via drm-misc) is a bit too much. So perhaps a maintained TI tree would be an option too, and pushing everything for omapdrm and tidss via that tree. I'm fine with all options, so I think we can go with whatever is most acceptable from DRM maintainer point of view. Tomi -- Texas Instruments Finland Oy, Porkkalankatu 22, 00180 Helsinki. Y-tunnus/Business ID: 0615521-4. Kotipaikka/Domicile: Helsinki