From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49C66C432BE for ; Mon, 16 Aug 2021 14:48:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EBA16056B for ; Mon, 16 Aug 2021 14:48:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232234AbhHPOtW (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Aug 2021 10:49:22 -0400 Received: from mga17.intel.com ([192.55.52.151]:32699 "EHLO mga17.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232095AbhHPOtW (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Aug 2021 10:49:22 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6200,9189,10078"; a="196140208" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.84,326,1620716400"; d="scan'208";a="196140208" Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by fmsmga107.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Aug 2021 07:48:50 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.84,326,1620716400"; d="scan'208";a="504935472" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com (HELO smile) ([10.237.68.40]) by orsmga001-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Aug 2021 07:48:47 -0700 Received: from andy by smile with local (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1mFduq-00AQUa-Ie; Mon, 16 Aug 2021 17:48:40 +0300 Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2021 17:48:40 +0300 From: Andy Shevchenko To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" , ACPI Devel Maling List , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , the arch/x86 maintainers , "H. Peter Anvin" , Hans de Goede , Linus Walleij , Bartosz Golaszewski , "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] x86/platform: Increase maximum GPIO number for X86_64 Message-ID: References: <20210806143711.37553-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 03:55:59PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 3:35 PM Andy Shevchenko > wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 03:25:13PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 4:44 PM Andy Shevchenko > > > wrote: ... > > > Wouldn't > > > > > > default 1024 if X86_64 > > > default 512 > > > > > > be sufficient? > > > > > > It's either X86_64 or X86_32 anyway AFAICS. Fixed in v2. ... > > Btw, what do you think. do we need comment above and help text here? I copied > > these from ARM, but I'm not sure it would be useful on x86 as much. > > Both the comment and the help text aren't particularly useful IMO. > > The comment is a bit confusing even, because x86 kernels are > multiplatform as a rule. Ditto. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko