linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] PCI: Add ASPEED vendor ID

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: <6b7c1f22-2d97-bda9-affd-2e3a7a1d42ed@kernel.org>
Date:   Fri, 21 Apr 2023 07:04:14 +0900
From:   Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@...nel.org>
To:     Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>
Cc:     "open list:PCI SUBSYSTEM" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:DRM DRIVER FOR AST SERVER GRAPHICS CHIPS" 
        <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        Dave Airlie <airlied@...hat.com>,
        Patrick McLean <chutzpah@...too.org>, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: Add ASPEED vendor ID

On 4/21/23 04:10, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> [+cc Damien, linux-ide]
> 
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2023 at 09:08:48AM +0200, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
>> Am 19.04.23 um 20:37 schrieb Bjorn Helgaas:
>>> On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 09:00:15AM +0200, Thomas Zimmermann wrote:
>>>> Am 19.04.23 um 00:57 schrieb Patrick McLean:
>>>>> Currently the ASPEED PCI vendor ID is defined in
>>>>> drivers/gpu/drm/ast/ast_drv.c, move that to include/linux/pci_ids.h
>>>>> with all the rest of the PCI vendor ID definitions. Rename the definition
>>>>> to follow the format that the other definitions follow.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks a lot. Can you please also move and rename the PCI device ids? [1]
>>>
>>> Generally we move things to pci_ids.h only when they are shared
>>> between multiple drivers.  This is mostly to make backports easier.
>>>
>>> PCI_VENDOR_ID_ASPEED is (or will be) used in both ast_drv.c and
>>> libata-core.c, so it qualifies.
>>>
>>> It doesn't look like PCI_CHIP_AST2000 and PCI_CHIP_AST2100 would
>>> qualify since they're only used in ast_drv.c and ast_main.c, which are
>>> part of the same driver.
>>
>> Ok, I see. Can I take the patch into DRM trees?
> 
> The first time around I got two patches [2].  This time I only got
> this patch, but IIUC there are still two patches in play here:
> 
>   - This one, which moves PCI_VENDOR_ID_ASPEED to pci_ids.h, and
>   - The libata-core one that adds a use in ata_dev_config_ncq()
> 
> Those should go together via the same tree.  I supplied my ack to
> indicate that I'm not going to merge anything myself, and I expect
> whoever merges the libata patch to also merge this one.
> 
> If for some reason the libata-core patch doesn't happen, then this
> patch shouldn't happen either, because there would no longer be any
> sharing between drivers that would justify a pci_ids.h addition.

I can take both patches through the libata tree but there were comments on the
second patch for libata and I have not seen these addressed yet (I did not get a
v2). And in the meantime, it seems that the PCI ID patch was reworked as a
single patch... Not sure what's happening here.