On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 4:14 PM WANG Xuerui <kernel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 2023/5/22 16:02, Sui Jingfeng wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On 2023/5/21 20:21, WANG Xuerui wrote: > >>> --- /dev/null > >>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/loongson/Kconfig > >>> @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ > >>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > >>> + > >>> +config DRM_LOONGSON > >>> + tristate "DRM support for Loongson Graphics" > >>> + depends on DRM && PCI && MMU > >>> + select DRM_KMS_HELPER > >>> + select DRM_TTM > >>> + select I2C > >>> + select I2C_ALGOBIT > >>> + help > >>> + This is a DRM driver for Loongson Graphics, it may including > >> > >> Drop "it may"; "including" should be enough. > >> > > 'it may' is more *precise* here, because currently we don't ship with > > the support for loongson 2K series SoC. > > > > I'm try to be precise as far as I can, we avoid made this driver too > > large by ignore loongson 2K series SoC temporary. > > That's a good idea! For now the patch is so large that my review reply > is said to be dropped by the lists. Focusing on one bunch of similar > models first then adding support for the rest not-so-similar models is > very friendly towards the reviewing process and will help code quality too. I suggest split the LS2K parts to a separate patch, but keep it in the same series to get them upstreamed together. Huacai > > > > >>> + LS7A2000, LS7A1000, LS2K2000 and LS2K1000 etc. Loongson LS7A > >>> + series are bridge chipset, while Loongson LS2K series are SoC. > >>> + > >>> + If "M" is selected, the module will be called loongson. > >> > >> Just "loongson"? > > > > Yes, when compile this driver as module, loongson.ko will be generated. > > > > drm radeon is also doing so, See drm/radeon/Kconfig. > > > >> I know it's like this for ages (at least dating back to the MIPS days) > >> but you really don't want to imply Loongson is mainly a GPU company. > >> Something like "loongson_drm" or "lsdc" or "gsgpu" could be better. > > > > No, these name may have backward compatibility problems. > > > > Downstream driver already taken those name. > > > > userspace driver need to differentiate them who is who. > > IMO this shouldn't be a problem. Let me try explaining this: currently, > upstream / the "new world" doesn't have any support for this driver at > all, so any name will work; just use whatever is appropriate from an > upstream's perspective, then make the userspace bits recognize both > variants, and you'll be fine. And the "existing" userspace drivers can > also carry the change, it'll just be a branch never taken in that setup. > > So, I'm still in favor of keeping the upstream "clean" without dubious > names like this (bare "loongson"). What do you think about my suggestion > above? > > -- > WANG "xen0n" Xuerui > > Linux/LoongArch mailing list: https://lore.kernel.org/loongarch/ >
