linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/4] platform/x86: Add crystal_cove

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: <980d3895-b9c1-6f3c-3b7e-b5fc208769ad@redhat.com>
Date:   Thu, 30 Dec 2021 19:40:29 +0100
From:   Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc:     Mark Gross <markgross@...nel.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy@...radead.org>,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        Stephan Gerhold <stephan@...hold.net>,
        Platform Driver <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] platform/x86: Add crystal_cove_charger driver

Hi,

On 12/25/21 15:37, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 25, 2021 at 1:55 PM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com> wrote:
>>
>> Driver for the external-charger IRQ pass-through function of the
>> Bay Trail Crystal Cove PMIC.
> 
> Intel Bay Trail (same in the code)

Ack will fix before merging.

>> Note this is NOT a power_supply class driver, it just deals with IRQ
>> pass-through, this requires this separate driver because the PMIC's
>> level 2 interrupt for this must be explicitly acked.
>>
>> This new driver gets enabled by the existing X86_ANDROID_TABLETS Kconfig
>> option because the x86-android-tablets module is the only user of the
>> exported external-charger IRQ.
> 
> ...
> 
>>  drivers/platform/x86/crystal_cove_charger.c | 153 ++++++++++++++++++++
> 
> I'm wondering why it's not under the intel/ subfolder. Do we expect to
> have the same PMIC used on other x86 vendors?

I was wondering about doing this myself before submitting this upstream,
since you have the same idea, lets go for it. I'll move this before
merging it.

> 
> ...
> 
>> +static int crystal_cove_charger_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> +{
> 
> Adding
> 
>   struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> 
> may increase readability a bit and perhaps reduce the amount of LOCs.

Normally I'm a fan of doing that myself, but it doesn't really help
here since there are only a few references and those fit in 1 line.

Regards,

Hans