[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <E8C4F9764DD41E5E+97d54ecc-9519-4ec5-a995-5c9dc45961cd@uniontech.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2025 11:18:26 +0800
From: Cryolitia PukNgae <cryolitia@...ontech.com>
To: Antheas Kapenekakis <lkml@...heas.dev>
Cc: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>, 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
On 31/07/2025 16.13, Antheas Kapenekakis wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Jul 2025 at 05:30, Cryolitia PukNgae <liziyao@...ontech.com> wrote:
>>
>> 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?
>
> Either is fine by me. The move is simply a rename anyway. My reasoning
> was it will take a bit of back and forth to get approved and charge
> limiting is a standard feature now on all manufacturers except GPD, so
> I expect them to add it soon. But since it is a rename, it is not a
> blocker for reviewing in any case.
>
> If you want more comments I think you should send a new current
> version so it can be reviewed again. It has been a while since the
> previous one.
I have sent the 7th version two weeks ago. I would like to hear your
comments if you have a free time to take a look at it. Thx a lot.
> Antheas
>
>> 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
>>>
Best regards,
Cryolitia
Powered by blists - more mailing lists