linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] hwmon: add GPD devices sensor driver

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: <4CFDED845BBB7FFB+10019dea-8229-4681-9beb-5f351eb8faf4@uniontech.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2025 11:30:15 +0800
From: Cryolitia PukNgae <liziyao@...ontech.com>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>, Antheas Kapenekakis <lkml@...heas.dev>
Cc: Cryolitia@...il.com, Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.com>,
 Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
 Celeste Liu <CoelacanthusHex@...il.com>, Yao Zi <ziyao@...root.org>,
 Derek John Clark <derekjohn.clark@...il.com>,
 Marcin Strągowski <marcin@...agowski.com>,
 someone5678 <someone5678.dev@...il.com>,
 Justin Weiss <justin@...tinweiss.com>, command_block <mtf@...me>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] hwmon: add GPD devices sensor driver

Personally, I'd prefer to maintain this small driver in the hwmon
subsystem until we need to write drivers for the same EC with more
diverse subsystem functionality. We can then discuss and learn how to
evolve it. I personally don't think that's going to happen in the near
future.

So, could we continue reviewing the current patch series? Where are we 
stuck?

在 2025/7/31 01:26, Guenter Roeck 写道:
> On 7/30/25 02:24, Cryolitia wrote:
>> Thank you for raising this valid concern. We've closely monitored GPD's
>> development plans and currently see no indication of EC functionality
>> expansion beyond thermal sensors in the foreseeable future. Given this
>> observation, we believe placing the driver in hwmon remains appropriate
>> for now.
>>
>> That said, we fully respect your maintainer perspective on
>> future-proofing. If you feel strongly that platform/x86 would be a safer
>> long-term home despite the current scope, we're happy to move the driver
>> there immediately. We're committed to finding the most sustainable
>> solution for upstream.
>>
> 
> As hwmon maintainer, I feel strongly (since you used the word) that moving
> the driver (or any hwmon driver, for that matter) out of hwmon space would
> be a bad idea, but I won't prevent you from doing it either. It means less
> work for me, after all.
> 
> Guenter
> 
>