linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] acpi:apd:add AMD ACPI2Platform device support for x86 system.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <2267517.glgofXUn7B@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date:	Mon, 24 Nov 2014 02:47:32 +0100
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To:	"Xue, Ken" <Ken.Xue@....com>
Cc:	"lenb@...nel.org" <lenb@...nel.org>,
	"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Wu, Jeff" <Jeff.Wu@....com>,
	Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
	Andriy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] acpi:apd:add AMD ACPI2Platform device support for x86 system.

On Monday, November 24, 2014 01:02:30 AM Xue, Ken wrote:
> 
> On Tuesday, November 18, 2014 01:58:11 PM Ken Xue wrote:
> > This new feature is to interpret AMD specific ACPI device to platform 
> > device such as I2C, UART found on AMD CZ and later chipsets. It is 
> > based on example INTEL LPSS. Now, it can support AMD I2C & UART.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Ken Xue <Ken.Xue@....com>
> > Signed-off-by: Jeff Wu <Jeff.Wu@....com>
> 
> Generally speaking, this seems to duplicate much code from acpi_lpss which should be re-used instead.  What about moving the code that will be common between acpi_lpss and the new driver into a new file (say acpi_soc.c)?
> 
> Also, you need to avoid automatic creation of platform devices when !X86_AMD_PLATFORM_DEVICE in analogy with what acpi_lpss does, or bad things will happen.
> 
> [ken] sounds fair enough.  Let me take action to merge drivers to acpi_soc.c ? or you have other plan?

I'd prefer the common code to reside in one file (or one .c file and one header
file), and the driver-specific code to stay in separate per-driver files.

-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/