linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] mfd: intel_ehl_pse_gpio: Introduce Intel Elkhart Lake PSE GPIO and TIO

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]

Message-ID: <Z-PCgJY8qBPBWKVN@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2025 11:01:52 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Raag Jadav <raag.jadav@...el.com>, Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>,
	giometti@...eenne.com, raymond.tan@...el.com,
	linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] mfd: intel_ehl_pse_gpio: Introduce Intel Elkhart
 Lake PSE GPIO and TIO

On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 08:45:29PM -0400, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 03:22:36PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 06:04:38AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Fri, Mar 21, 2025 at 07:28:22AM +0200, Raag Jadav wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 01:57:35PM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, 14 Mar 2025, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

...

> > > > > Also, Greg has been quite vocal about converting PCI devices to Platform
> > > > > ones in the past.  We may wish to run this past him before continuing.
> > > > 
> > > > Greg, any objections on moving forward with platform device?
> > > 
> > > I have no context here at all, why would a PCI device EVER be a platform
> > > device?  That feels wrong on so many levels...
> > 
> > It's a multi-functional device, in other words that device provides a set of
> > (dependent or independent) subdevices. But do you have other suggestion?
> > The auxiliary bus?
> 
> Yes, that is exactly what the auxiliary bus code was designed and
> written for.

Lee, what do you think of extending mfd to cover this case, i.e. specifically
for the PCI devices? Or maybe it makes sense to go to the auxiliary bus
completely (I think this may break a lot of things on legacy systems, though).

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko