Re: [PATCH] misc/mei: INTEL_MEI should depend on X86 or DRM_XE

Re: [PATCH] misc/mei: INTEL_MEI should depend on X86 or DRM_XE

[Rodrigo Vivi]

On Thu, Jan 29, 2026 at 12:53:12AM -0500, Usyskin, Alexander wrote:
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] misc/mei: INTEL_MEI should depend on X86 or DRM_XE
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On 1/28/26 3:57 PM, Usyskin, Alexander wrote:
> > 
> > > There are different usages of mei:
> > > - for discrete graphics xe/i915 will load mei via auxiliary device also on non
> > x86.
> > > - for integrated xe/i915 communicate with mei for on-chip CSME - this
> > scenario is x86 only.
> > 
> > > IMO this should cover all:
> > > depends on X86 || DRM_XE!=n || DRM_I915!=n || COMPILE_TEST
> > 
> > Is there discrete i915?
> > 
> 
> DG1, Alchemist and some server cards are supported by i915
> 
> > DRM_I915 depends on PCI && X86 (so "X86 || DRM_I915" is redundant,
> > which
> > is why I didn't add it in my version of the patch. If DRM_I915 is useful
> > on non-x86 we might want to change that as well.
> > 
> 
> Let ask gfx people.

Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

> Rodrigo, is DRM_I915 useful on non-x86?

No, I really don't believe it would work out.

> 
> > Also, is there any policy on dependency ordering? On non-X86, INTEL_MEI
> > becomes available only after selecting DRM_XE, which is in a directory
> > included much later, so the question is not shown initially, is that a
> > problem?
> > 
> 
> By not enabling INTEL_MEI the biggest thing that you loose are the firmware update.
> I'm not sure how to sort this out and if it is worth the effort.
> 
> - - 
> Thanks,
> Sasha
> 
> 

RE: [PATCH] misc/mei: INTEL_MEI should depend on X86 or DRM_XE

[Usyskin, Alexander]

> > >
> > > > There are different usages of mei:
> > > > - for discrete graphics xe/i915 will load mei via auxiliary device also on non
> > > x86.
> > > > - for integrated xe/i915 communicate with mei for on-chip CSME - this
> > > scenario is x86 only.
> > >
> > > > IMO this should cover all:
> > > > depends on X86 || DRM_XE!=n || DRM_I915!=n || COMPILE_TEST
> > >
> > > Is there discrete i915?
> > >
> >
> > DG1, Alchemist and some server cards are supported by i915
> >
> > > DRM_I915 depends on PCI && X86 (so "X86 || DRM_I915" is redundant,
> > > which
> > > is why I didn't add it in my version of the patch. If DRM_I915 is useful
> > > on non-x86 we might want to change that as well.
> > >
> >
> > Let ask gfx people.
> 
> Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> 
> > Rodrigo, is DRM_I915 useful on non-x86?
> 
> No, I really don't believe it would work out.
> 

In this case the below should be good, I suppose:

depends on X86 || DRM_XE!=n || COMPILE_TEST

- - 
Thanks,
Sasha

Re: [PATCH] misc/mei: INTEL_MEI should depend on X86 or DRM_XE

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

Hi Sasha

On Sun, 1 Feb 2026 at 11:15, Usyskin, Alexander
<alexander.usyskin@intel.com> wrote:
> > > > > There are different usages of mei:
> > > > > - for discrete graphics xe/i915 will load mei via auxiliary device also on non
> > > > x86.
> > > > > - for integrated xe/i915 communicate with mei for on-chip CSME - this
> > > > scenario is x86 only.
> > > >
> > > > > IMO this should cover all:
> > > > > depends on X86 || DRM_XE!=n || DRM_I915!=n || COMPILE_TEST
> > > >
> > > > Is there discrete i915?
> > >
> > > DG1, Alchemist and some server cards are supported by i915
> > >
> > > > DRM_I915 depends on PCI && X86 (so "X86 || DRM_I915" is redundant,
> > > > which
> > > > is why I didn't add it in my version of the patch. If DRM_I915 is useful
> > > > on non-x86 we might want to change that as well.
> > >
> > > Let ask gfx people.
> >
> > Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> >
> > > Rodrigo, is DRM_I915 useful on non-x86?
> >
> > No, I really don't believe it would work out.
>
> In this case the below should be good, I suppose:
>
> depends on X86 || DRM_XE!=n || COMPILE_TEST

... which is exactly what I added in my patch. So life's good?

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds

RE: [PATCH] misc/mei: INTEL_MEI should depend on X86 or DRM_XE

[Usyskin, Alexander]

> Subject: Re: [PATCH] misc/mei: INTEL_MEI should depend on X86 or DRM_XE
> 
> Hi Sasha
> 
> On Sun, 1 Feb 2026 at 11:15, Usyskin, Alexander
> <alexander.usyskin@intel.com> wrote:
> > > > > > There are different usages of mei:
> > > > > > - for discrete graphics xe/i915 will load mei via auxiliary device also on
> non
> > > > > x86.
> > > > > > - for integrated xe/i915 communicate with mei for on-chip CSME - this
> > > > > scenario is x86 only.
> > > > >
> > > > > > IMO this should cover all:
> > > > > > depends on X86 || DRM_XE!=n || DRM_I915!=n || COMPILE_TEST
> > > > >
> > > > > Is there discrete i915?
> > > >
> > > > DG1, Alchemist and some server cards are supported by i915
> > > >
> > > > > DRM_I915 depends on PCI && X86 (so "X86 || DRM_I915" is
> redundant,
> > > > > which
> > > > > is why I didn't add it in my version of the patch. If DRM_I915 is useful
> > > > > on non-x86 we might want to change that as well.
> > > >
> > > > Let ask gfx people.
> > >
> > > Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> > >
> > > > Rodrigo, is DRM_I915 useful on non-x86?
> > >
> > > No, I really don't believe it would work out.
> >
> > In this case the below should be good, I suppose:
> >
> > depends on X86 || DRM_XE!=n || COMPILE_TEST
> 
> ... which is exactly what I added in my patch. So life's good?
> 

From my point of view now - yes, it is reasonable.

- - 
Thanks,
Sasha