linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] ACPI / PMIC: Add i2c address to intel_pmic

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Mon, 18 Oct 2021 16:01:22 +0200
From:   Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc:     Tsuchiya Yuto <kitakar@...il.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>,
        Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
        ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] ACPI / PMIC: Add i2c address to intel_pmic_bytcrc
 driver

Hi,

On 10/18/21 12:46, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 12:38:51PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
>> On 10/18/21 12:31, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 12:16 PM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com> wrote:
> 
> ...
> 
>>> Btw, IIRC similar code (i.e. BYT vs CHT by CPU
>>> ID) is being used elsewhere. Perhaps we might have some common
>>> (library) under arc/x86, PDx86 or so (headers?)?
>>
>> We already have helpers for this defined in:
>>
>> sound/soc/intel/common/soc-intel-quirks.h
>>
>> We could move those to some header under include, maybe:
>>
>> include/linux/platform_data/x86/atom.h
>>
>> And add #ifdef-ery there so that things will also build on
>> non x86 ?
>>
>> Then we could do a 2 patch series adding the
>> include/linux/platform_data/x86/atom.h
>> file + the drivers/mfd/intel_soc_pmic_core.c
>> change and Lee can merge both through the MFD tree.
>>
>> And then we can do further clean-ups of e.g. sound/soc
>> on top (we can ask Lee to provide an immutable branch).
>>
>> How does that sound ?
> 
> Sounds like a good plan to me!

So I've been thinking about this a bit more.

Since sound/soc/intel/common/soc-intel-quirks.h already
has stubs for non X86 too, I think it is best to just
move that to include/linux/platform_data/x86/soc.h .

Since the drivers/mfd/intel_soc_pmic_core.c thing is
a bugfix of sorts, it is probably best to open-code
the check there and then replace it with the helper
from include/linux/platform_data/x86/soc.h later.

I'll start prepping a patch series doing things
this way now.

Regards,

Hans