RE: [PATCH] i3c: make sure the PID is set before registering the device

From: Vitor Soares <Vitor.Soares@synopsys.com>
To: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@collabora.com>
Cc: "Przemysław Gaj" <pgaj@cadence.com>,
	"bbrezillon@kernel.org" <bbrezillon@kernel.org>,
	"linux-i3c@lists.infradead.org" <linux-i3c@lists.infradead.org>,
	"rafalc@cadence.com" <rafalc@cadence.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] i3c: make sure the PID is set before registering the device
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2019 14:28:15 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CH2PR12MB4216B9AF8D7BDD7E3A950E9CAE5B0@CH2PR12MB4216.namprd12.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191209132616.22ba009c@collabora.com>

Hi Boris,

From: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@collabora.com>
Date: Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 12:26:16

> On Mon, 9 Dec 2019 12:20:03 +0000
> Vitor Soares <Vitor.Soares@synopsys.com> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Boris,
> > 
> > From: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@collabora.com>
> > Date: Mon, Dec 09, 2019 at 09:47:11
> > 
> > > On Sun, 8 Dec 2019 15:18:34 +0100
> > > Przemysław Gaj <pgaj@cadence.com> wrote:
> > >   
> > > > From: Przemyslaw Gaj <pgaj@cadence.com>
> > > > 
> > > > Provisioned ID (PID) is the value with which device drivers are
> > > > matched. I check the value before registering the device.
> > > >   
> > > 
> > > Can this situation (having a device with a DA but without a valid PID)
> > > happen right now or is this something you need to support secondary
> > > masters who receive device DA (through DEFSVLS) without being able to
> > > query extra information until they own the bus?  
> > 
> > This is the use case where a device fails the 
> > i3c_master_pre_assign_dyn_addr() and I already mention it on [1].
> > I still think the best way is to detach/free the devices that fails 
> > during i3c_master_pre_assign_dyn_addr().
> 
> And I disagree (I gave my arguments already, so won't repeat them
> here).

Sorry Boris, did you give? I ask you several times why to keep non DA 
devices attached to the bus, yet you wasn't able to give me a technical 
reason. Even from device model you should kept them.
Honestly, I'm starting ask myself if this is something against because 
every time that I'm trying to improve something I just see difficulty 
from your side.

> Can we move on please?

I think you should start learning to listen the other and have the 
greatness to accept the others experience and opinions. With your 
experience you should already learn that.
The previous patch makes all the sense yet your response was - I am not 
convinced. Could you please give a proper justification? At least test 
what I spend time to do?

> Can you send a new version that does what
> I suggest, or should I ask Przemek to do it?

Does the ethics approve such attitude? Don't you see with kind of 
attitude you are just putting people away of this subsystem?

> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-i3c mailing list
> linux-i3c@lists.infradead.org
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.infradead.org_mailman_listinfo_linux-2Di3c&d=DwIGaQ&c=DPL6_X_6JkXFx7AXWqB0tg&r=qVuU64u9x77Y0Kd0PhDK_lpxFgg6PK9PateHwjb_DY0&m=cXyPCHO2vhcyD3aN-LnqOqzodbB9g-utJXeWOQRkJmk&s=odrtYhb-IaK-dfTzi1p7TwH2YJcnZ3RSdNNrKJjXFdM&e= 

Best regards,
Vitor Soares

_______________________________________________
linux-i3c mailing list
linux-i3c@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-i3c