[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <dc564c29-38fc-4b9d-8b1c-c6f890b2333c@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2025 07:09:56 -0500
From: Mario Limonciello <superm1@...nel.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.com>, Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@...nel.org>,
Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>,
Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@....com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@...nel.org>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Shyam Sundar S K <Shyam-sundar.S-k@....com>,
Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
"open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:I2C/SMBUS CONTROLLER DRIVERS FOR PC" <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:AMD PMC DRIVER" <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] i2c: piix4: Move SB800_PIIX4_FCH_PM_ADDR
definition to amd_node.h
On 4/11/25 06:49, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 03:02:00PM -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote:
>> From: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>
>>
>> SB800_PIIX4_FCH_PM_ADDR is used to indicate the base address for the
>> FCH PM registers. Multiple drivers may need this base address, so
>> move it to a common header location and rename accordingly.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>
>> ---
>> arch/x86/include/asm/amd_node.h | 2 ++
>> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-piix4.c | 12 ++++++------
>> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/amd_node.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/amd_node.h
>> index 23fe617898a8f..f4993201834ea 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/amd_node.h
>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/amd_node.h
>> @@ -19,6 +19,8 @@
>>
>> #include <linux/pci.h>
>>
>> +#define FCH_PM_BASE 0xFED80300
>
> Is that even related to amd_node?
>
> Or should it be in some x86...platform.h header?
>
I was aiming for a header that we would conceivably use in all these
places anyway.
Can you suggest a more fitting existing header? A new one felt too
heavy for a single register define.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists