Re: [PATCH v4 08/13] serial: sh-sci: Introduced function pointers

Wolfram Sang <[email protected]> Mon, 17 Mar 2025 10:55:09 +0100

Newsgroups	gmane.linux.kernel,gmane.linux.kernel.renesas-soc,gmane.linux.serial,gmane.linux.ports.sh.devel
Message-ID	<Z9fxfV9jAGJ51fcn@shikoro>

Hi all,

sorry for missing this series so far and thanks to Geert for pulling me
into the loop.

> While most rough edges have been polished by now (thanks!), and the
> driver seems to still work on a variety of platforms, I am still
> worried about the impact of this change:
>   - Maintainability and future bug fixing?

I hate to see development work going to waste, yet I have to say I am
also concerned about the maintainability of this driver after this very
intrusive changeset. The driver is already quite complex. Adding another
layer of complexity (function pointers) will make proper bugfixing for
all supported instances quite harder, I'd think.

Has it been discussed to have this as a separate driver? Were there
reasons against it? This is really an open question. Maybe it is
justified to do it like this if we have reasons for it.

Seeing that SCI core needs 800+ lines changed and we still have a
seperate driver with 460 lines driver, I do wonder if copying the logic
from SCI core to a seperate driver would make sense. I am aware that the
core has currently 3500+ lines currently. I'd estimate it would shrink
quite a bit when copying because you won't need to handle all the
differences to other SCI entries.

Again, this is not a request to follow my suggestion, it is an open
question to make sure all paths have been considered.

Thanks and happy hacking,

   Wolfram

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 833 B)