[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75VcKYc4BWCM_8Zm7NONceAm2BbhTgDKOweu-qM9yLUHUJw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2021 13:54:13 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: linux-kernel-dev <linux-kernel-dev@...khoff.com>
Cc: "hdegoede@...hat.com" <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
"andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com"
<andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
"mgross@...ux.intel.com" <mgross@...ux.intel.com>,
"platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org"
<platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: pmc_atom: Match all Beckhoff Automation
baytrail boards with critclk_systems DMI table
On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 1:39 PM linux-kernel-dev
<linux-kernel-dev@...khoff.com> wrote:
> On Mo, 2021-04-12 at 12:43 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 12:29 PM Steffen Dirkwinkel
> > <linux-kernel-dev@...khoff.com> wrote:
...
> > I'm afraid it's a bit too much. Is there any guarantee all the boards
> > based on x86 will be Baytrail only?
> >
> Sorry, I guess I should make this clearer in the message.
> All boards with "CBxx63" are Baytrail.
Exactly! And this supports my idea that this shouldn't be done like in
this patch.
Are you guaranteeing that *all x86-based* boards produced by your
company will be Baytrail only?
Above tells that the answer is rather "no". So, I think we can't apply
this patch in its current form.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists