Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/2] platform: toradex: Add toradex embedded controller

[Andy Shevchenko <andy@kernel.org>]

On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 10:31:27AM +0100, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 04:54:59PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 03:43:29PM +0100, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> > > From: Francesco Dolcini <francesco.dolcini@toradex.com>
> > > 
> > > This series adds support for the Toradex Embedded Controller, currently used
> > > on Toradex SMARC iMX95 and iMX8MP boards, with more to come in the future.
> > 
> > How many do you have that will come with like 99% guarantee?
> 
> None? What I know is that
> 
>  - Toradex is building SoM since 20 years and not planning to stop any
>    time soon
>  - Recently we decided to get into the SMARC market
>  - From an engineering side we decided that it was the best decision to
>    have a small microcontroller to act as an embedded controller, sitting
>    between the SoC and the PMIC, handling reset, power-up/down sequence,
>    strapping options, I/Os and potentially more
>  - In our roadmap we have more SMARC based products planned
>  - The firmware interface is designed to be generic and handle future
>    boards
>  - We expect to use the same driver for any upcoming board using such
>    embedded controller, the EC firmware and the DT will be the only
>    differences.
> 
> But, I do not have a third product in my hands now, so, I have no such a
> thing as 99% guarantee. Honestly I have only one thing in my future with
> such a high probability ;-)

So, perhaps it is not a good start for a brand new folder right now
as we might not see any new products.

> > > The EC provides board power-off, reset and GPIO expander functionalities.
> > > 
> > > Sending it as an RFC to gather initial feedback on it before investing more
> > > time in testing and adding the remaining functionalities, with that said both
> > > the code and the binding are in condition to be wholly reviewed.
> > 
> > This doesn't explain why you need a separate folder.
> 
> Can you be more specific here? You mean the `toradex` directory, within
> `drivers/platform`? The only reason is that maybe we'll break the driver
> in multiple files, but we can as well just get rid of it. We did not
> think much at it.

Yes, kinda. I mean the folder in par of, e.g., Chrome OS related HW.

> BTW, the idea to have this driver in such a way was partially inspired
> by drivers/platform/cznic/, that was merged a few months ago.

Ah, I see. They have already 3 devices on the market.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko