From: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>,
Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/mrst: add SFI platform device parsing code
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2010 11:52:09 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100923105208.GD25663@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100923115818.0cac8d06@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 11:58:18AM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> wrote:
> > So what is the plan for coping with OEM systems? Right now the code
> > makes no provision at all that I can see for system-specific handling
> > of the SFI data which seems very optimistic.
> There are various system specific drivers which have their own sfi entry
> and name. Telling platforms apart is a problem with SFI but the latest
> firmware also supports DMI so we can get platform identification via the
> normal PC interfaces.
So the expectation is that the platform data parser functions in the SFI
device list will be querying the DMI data and selecting the actual
parsing based on that? Perhaps adding DMI keys to the match tables so
the infrastructure is there for doing the device specific things would
cover it; minor differences could be worked out in the default match
function and we can drop back to board specific functions when it gets
too messy.
My main issue here is that the code is working on the assumption that we
have one standard idea of what the SFI data means and provides no
guidance to users about handling the inevitable variations.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-09-23 10:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-09-20 14:01 [PATCH] x86/mrst: add SFI platform device parsing code Alan Cox
2010-09-20 15:04 ` Mark Brown
2010-09-20 14:27 ` Alan Cox
2010-09-20 15:27 ` Mark Brown
2010-09-22 4:03 ` Grant Likely
2010-09-22 15:22 ` David Woodhouse
2010-09-22 15:33 ` Mark Brown
2010-09-22 15:35 ` David Woodhouse
2010-09-22 15:39 ` Mark Brown
2010-09-22 22:04 ` Alan Cox
2010-09-22 22:15 ` Alan Cox
2010-09-23 6:07 ` Grant Likely
2010-09-23 9:54 ` Mark Brown
2010-09-23 10:27 ` Alan Cox
2010-09-23 10:27 ` Mark Brown
2010-09-23 10:58 ` Alan Cox
2010-09-23 10:52 ` Mark Brown [this message]
2010-09-23 10:13 ` Alan Cox
2010-09-23 14:11 ` Mark Brown
2010-09-23 13:27 ` Alan Cox
2010-09-23 14:46 ` Mark Brown
2010-09-23 15:55 ` Alan Cox
2010-09-23 10:48 ` Alan Cox
2010-09-23 10:54 ` Mark Brown
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100923105208.GD25663@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main \
--to=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--cc=alan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox