linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] platform/x86: intel_pmc_ipc: add option to build without ACPI

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <2a00773a-b887-7966-36de-0e2b93359912@linux.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2025 13:56:04 +0200 (EET)
From: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
cc: Choong Yong Liang <yong.liang.choong@...ux.intel.com>, 
    Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>, 
    Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>, 
    David E Box <david.e.box@...ux.intel.com>, 
    platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] platform/x86: intel_pmc_ipc: add option to build
 without ACPI

On Thu, 13 Mar 2025, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 10:55 AM Choong Yong Liang
> <yong.liang.choong@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > From: David E. Box <david.e.box@...ux.intel.com>
> >
> > Introduce a configuration option that allows users to build the
> > intel_pmc_ipc driver without ACPI support. This is useful for
> > systems where ACPI is not available or desired.
> >
> > Based on the discussion from the patch [1], it was necessary to
> > provide this option to accommodate specific use cases.
> 
> > Link: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20250227121522.1802832-6-yong.liang.choong@linux.intel.com/#26280764 [1]
> 
> >
> 
> No blank line here, but I think Hans or Ilpo may tweak this when applying.
> 
> Otherwise LGTM,
> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>
> Thanks!

Hi both,

The original commit went through net-next tree so I cannot take this into 
pdx86 tree until after the merge window. It seems low impact enough that 
coordinating with the netdev might not be worth the effort.

To get it going through net-next tree, you'd need to submit v3 so that in 
addition to the current receipients, all relevant netdev people & ML are 
included as receipients. But I'd be fine if you leave it until after the 
merge window and I can then handle it then.

> > Signed-off-by: David E. Box <david.e.box@...ux.intel.com>
> > Co-developed-by: Choong Yong Liang <yong.liang.choong@...ux.intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Choong Yong Liang <yong.liang.choong@...ux.intel.com>

-- 
 i.