From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hans de Goede Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 07:27:26 +0000 Subject: Re: [lm-sensors] [RFC] (almost) booting allyesconfig -- please Message-Id: <48770B5E.7000308@hhs.nl> List-Id: References: <48768018.2070704@hhs.nl> <20080711085246.1ead773b@hyperion.delvare> In-Reply-To: <20080711085246.1ead773b@hyperion.delvare> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Jean Delvare Cc: Milton Miller , linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Samuel Ortiz , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org Jean Delvare wrote: > Hi Hans, hi Milton, > >> One could make a superio driver, and create sub-devices for the IR, >> I2C, floppy, parallel, etc >> nodes. > > There have been proposals to do this, and this would indeed be a very > good idea, but unfortunately nobody took the time to implement this > properly, push it upstream and volunteer to maintain it. The problem is > that you don't need just a "driver", but a new subsystem, that needs to > be designed and maintained. > Well, I believe there have been some lightweight superio locking coordinator patches been floating around on the lm_sensors list, and I have reviewed them and then a new version was done with my issues fixed. I kinda liked the proposed solution there, it was quite simple, moved all the generic superio stuff into generic superio code, and added locking for super io access from multiple drivers, what ever happened to those patches? If were to start using those, we could actually do a request region and then never release it, as things should be. Regards, Hans _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.versatel.nl (smtp1.versatel.nl [62.58.50.88]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 083CFDE020 for ; Fri, 11 Jul 2008 17:20:19 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <48770B5E.7000308@hhs.nl> Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 09:27:26 +0200 From: Hans de Goede MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jean Delvare Subject: Re: [RFC] (almost) booting allyesconfig -- please don't poke super-io without request_region References: <48768018.2070704@hhs.nl> <20080711085246.1ead773b@hyperion.delvare> In-Reply-To: <20080711085246.1ead773b@hyperion.delvare> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Samuel Ortiz , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Milton Miller , lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Jean Delvare wrote: > Hi Hans, hi Milton, > >> One could make a superio driver, and create sub-devices for the IR, >> I2C, floppy, parallel, etc >> nodes. > > There have been proposals to do this, and this would indeed be a very > good idea, but unfortunately nobody took the time to implement this > properly, push it upstream and volunteer to maintain it. The problem is > that you don't need just a "driver", but a new subsystem, that needs to > be designed and maintained. > Well, I believe there have been some lightweight superio locking coordinator patches been floating around on the lm_sensors list, and I have reviewed them and then a new version was done with my issues fixed. I kinda liked the proposed solution there, it was quite simple, moved all the generic superio stuff into generic superio code, and added locking for super io access from multiple drivers, what ever happened to those patches? If were to start using those, we could actually do a request region and then never release it, as things should be. Regards, Hans From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756090AbYGKHU1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Jul 2008 03:20:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753772AbYGKHUS (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Jul 2008 03:20:18 -0400 Received: from smtp1.versatel.nl ([62.58.50.88]:44543 "EHLO smtp1.versatel.nl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753426AbYGKHUR (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Jul 2008 03:20:17 -0400 Message-ID: <48770B5E.7000308@hhs.nl> Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 09:27:26 +0200 From: Hans de Goede User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080501) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jean Delvare CC: Milton Miller , linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Samuel Ortiz , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org Subject: Re: [RFC] (almost) booting allyesconfig -- please don't poke super-io without request_region References: <48768018.2070704@hhs.nl> <20080711085246.1ead773b@hyperion.delvare> In-Reply-To: <20080711085246.1ead773b@hyperion.delvare> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Jean Delvare wrote: > Hi Hans, hi Milton, > >> One could make a superio driver, and create sub-devices for the IR, >> I2C, floppy, parallel, etc >> nodes. > > There have been proposals to do this, and this would indeed be a very > good idea, but unfortunately nobody took the time to implement this > properly, push it upstream and volunteer to maintain it. The problem is > that you don't need just a "driver", but a new subsystem, that needs to > be designed and maintained. > Well, I believe there have been some lightweight superio locking coordinator patches been floating around on the lm_sensors list, and I have reviewed them and then a new version was done with my issues fixed. I kinda liked the proposed solution there, it was quite simple, moved all the generic superio stuff into generic superio code, and added locking for super io access from multiple drivers, what ever happened to those patches? If were to start using those, we could actually do a request region and then never release it, as things should be. Regards, Hans