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=-2.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no 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 A7BB4C64E7A for ; Tue, 1 Dec 2020 14:10:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4838520705 for ; Tue, 1 Dec 2020 14:10:14 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="gd0h+UVM" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2391645AbgLAOJr (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Dec 2020 09:09:47 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:42954 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2391358AbgLAOJq (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Dec 2020 09:09:46 -0500 Received: from mail-vs1-xe42.google.com (mail-vs1-xe42.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e42]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8A61BC0613D4 for ; Tue, 1 Dec 2020 06:09:06 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-vs1-xe42.google.com with SMTP id x4so948877vsp.7 for ; Tue, 01 Dec 2020 06:09:06 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=d53CrRsuKFphGM0Ukf26idzqPR8FDHjnWAcVRccas1I=; b=gd0h+UVMpnRlERqZSy4ZoI7yNpwNZeBMLcq1+3ThevcQjCevGt+rEFnpKwWxOTg7c/ ssG84Q6/luF3lsB8owsaQhCO41dTc02NVV5sbmk1n+H/pBg5eke0HE4fglKZBLid6B4r tJoETbGKWhU6ucVAhUQd3zKEOdjiP7Ehh5slPukj9fiKinVliooSZxwBaTXwVsYLrbHW Japrf34VaRnQizRXgTvx9FMxWKZWL40Y1VoDNIuk5BUNMr4Q9W7uQB6bFDrW3/cuW0bn kqiFN6S80So1r2kvEDwGAb+OaQQwWGMVNRTyAfsC0Ph1P9d1eJLia0uqnNylDpL4nNlq My7w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=d53CrRsuKFphGM0Ukf26idzqPR8FDHjnWAcVRccas1I=; b=kJS4Zt7sEYYPa1dXOCKjGVSjRJ6EdXR1gGmsh3mwiH9JwDAd000oRdI8Rt3cuQHpMd KnVwNMWUU+VVXw9OwHpaVf9OSdLYn+d6RlvjT3MzA8Z0MEvJkU5uQq1yHUdDO5O2l7bB OINrgRzxn6nQseKtyl30HFXim1UZCDeLNfBwJOWQSndsZJk+8Ai8xUsbjNIe8ZI4pA4h 0U1JVsgrQLLwpm6tGApus3WqV85KbCWctAqZELqPguC4oQ54QI3lxpkJz8FfEPv29hak eGciW4t/aqAuJN2PG27B2GfSKA22//Kte13xjq8agIPnrN/Y77sAGq+o6vO4q4sRK0iQ CP4w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533YzXy27T2swfETOcRj02m4stI/npoZEsew3ffoxlpXlW1nCPgB Qgb9BijZ9UyQUWCh04GbNAFxKbkdoUvWHWgjE4g= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx66nUh33kQIjJN8jGim1W210QOZOU1rDIRUdVx+dBdedc3HJE9QjDx9FMybhP6AnjfTQl3GAMqz9iqins3KHA= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6102:2148:: with SMTP id h8mr2584022vsg.12.1606831728725; Tue, 01 Dec 2020 06:08:48 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <2D7916FA-678F-4236-B478-C953CADF2FFA@goldelico.com> <4AC29229-9542-4E77-B993-217E29C7E209@goldelico.com> <460191B6-EDD3-46DE-A1ED-47F758F111E8@goldelico.com> In-Reply-To: <460191B6-EDD3-46DE-A1ED-47F758F111E8@goldelico.com> From: Sven Van Asbroeck Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2020 09:08:34 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [BUG] SPI broken for SPI based panel drivers To: "H. Nikolaus Schaller" Cc: Linus Walleij , Mark Brown , kernel list , Laurent Pinchart , Discussions about the Letux Kernel Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Dec 1, 2020 at 8:36 AM H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: > > Well I only complain because you wrote that you knew that it may > break something else. So it is known to induces a regression. We knew that it would fix an important, common problem, but we also knew that there is always a possibility of breaking something else when making a change to the core. > > Maybe printing a "please check your spi setup" in spi_setup() with > a comment hinting at your patch would have saved me a lot of time. > You could ask the maintainer for such a policy, but I fear that soon the code would emit too many "please check" messages. > > Well, I am sort of maintainer of a vendor kernel that tries to > follow linus/master and fix things before we release an LTS. Makes sense, I understand your situation better now. > > Anyways, there is still time until v5.10.0 to fix it better than by > a revert. When we find a fix, it'll have a Fixes: tag, which means it'll automatically be applied to every supported kernel, including v5.10 even if already released. > > Hope that you have an idea soon. I am happy to test any suggestions/patches/alternatives > better than a simple revert. > Thank you, that's great. I may come back with a few suggestions for you to test this week.