From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=none (no SPF record) smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com (client-ip=134.134.136.24; helo=mga09.intel.com; envelope-from=jae.hyun.yoo@linux.intel.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47RknZ3R2JzDqNL for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 12:25:36 +1100 (AEDT) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga004.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.38]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 02 Dec 2019 17:25:32 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.69,270,1571727600"; d="scan'208";a="361014916" Received: from unknown (HELO [10.241.241.9]) ([10.241.241.9]) by orsmga004.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 02 Dec 2019 17:25:32 -0800 Subject: Re: Dropping PECI patches To: Joel Stanley Cc: OpenBMC Maillist References: From: Jae Hyun Yoo Message-ID: Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2019 17:25:32 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Development list for OpenBMC List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2019 01:25:39 -0000 On 12/2/2019 1:54 PM, Joel Stanley wrote: > On Mon, 2 Dec 2019 at 18:09, Jae Hyun Yoo wrote: >> >> Hi Joel, >> >> Thanks for letting me know this. Also, thanks a lot for carrying the >> out-of-tree PECI patches in OpenBMC kernel tree so far. >> >> Can I submit updated PECI patches to OpenBMC upstream if I'm gonna add >> it back? Linux upstreaming isn't ready yet because configfs support >> should be implemented to address subsystem maintainer's comments but it >> needs at this moment in OpenBMC kernel tree to keep developing >> dbus-sensors support. > > This was the status back in January. I think it's time to find someone > to complete the work on PECI so it can be merged upstream. > > Once those patches have been posted, we can merge them into the > openbmc tree while we wait for them to be merged into mainline. I've made lots of update in Intel downstream PECI to address maintainers' comments except the configfs thing so I agree that PECI codes in OpenBMC kernel tree need to be updated. Can you give me a week for submission of new patch set into linux upstream? In the meantime, I'd like to keep the out-of-tree PECI patches if possible to avoid build breaks in dbus-sensors repo. Thanks, Jae >> >> Thanks, >> Jae >> >> On 12/1/2019 8:35 PM, Joel Stanley wrote: >>> Hi Jae, >>> >>> As I have not seen an upstream submission of PECI for a number of >>> release cycles (since January, over 10 months ago) it will be dropped >>> from the OpenBMC kernel tree. >>> >>> If you still want this code in the kernel you will need to make a new >>> upstream submission. >>> >>> This aligns with the OpenBMC kernel development process, where a patch >>> is carried to assist developers who are actively working to get their >>> drivers merged upstream >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Joel >>> >