public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
To: Mike Waychison <mikew@google.com>
Cc: Matt Domsch <Matt_Domsch@dell.com>,
	Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Duncan Laurie <dlaurie@google.com>,
	Aaron Durbin <adurbin@google.com>,
	x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Tim Hockin <thockin@google.com>, San Mehat <san@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 11/12] driver: Google EFI SMI
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 13:13:46 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110314201346.GA1084@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikhhYv2=memo-Rkhh1pG3v4-edrUROTgLoc6cbd@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 01:01:50PM -0700, Mike Waychison wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 8:47 AM, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 05:43:53PM -0800, Mike Waychison wrote:
> >> The "gsmi" driver bridges userland with firmware specific routines for
> >> accessing hardware.
> >
> > As with the other driver in this series, what keeps this driver from
> > being loaded on hardware that does not support this functionality?  If
> > it is loaded, will it cause bad things to happen?
> 
> gsmi itself is better guarded than the memconsole driver that the x86
> maintainers objected to.
> 
> It relies on keying off of a couple different strings, looking for
> "GOOGLE" as either the OEM ID in the  FADT table, or "Google, Inc." as
> the board vendor.  We further discriminate whether the driver should
> load (it doesn't apply to all of our boards) with a couple other
> checks.  See gsmi_system_valid().  I've added a comment to the patch
> description indicating this for the upcoming v3 send-out.

Ok, fair enough.  I'm guessing that you have tried testing the module by
loading it in a machine where this doesn't work?

> > Also, what causes it to be loaded on hardware that needs it?  There
> > should be some MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE somewhere in this thing to cause it
> > to be autoloaded?
> 
> I don't know if there is a good way to have this guy autoloaded, but
> that's probably fine. We will likely compile it in as a built-in or
> adjust our userland to have the module loaded.  We use it on all
> machines we've been building for the last 4-5 years, and a table of
> device IDs would just contain a list of a bunch of parts that aren't
> really google-specific.

What's wrong with using DMI strings?  Are there going to be that many
different ones of them here?

thanks,

greg k-h

  reply	other threads:[~2011-03-14 20:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-03-12  1:42 [PATCH v2 00/12] google firmware support Mike Waychison
2011-03-12  1:43 ` [PATCH v2 01/12] efivars: move efivars globals into struct efivars Mike Waychison
2011-03-12  1:43 ` [PATCH v2 02/12] efivars: Make efivars bin_attributes dynamic Mike Waychison
2011-03-12  1:43 ` [PATCH v2 03/12] efivars: parameterize efivars Mike Waychison
2011-03-12  1:43 ` [PATCH v2 04/12] efivars: Split out variable registration Mike Waychison
2011-03-12  1:43 ` [PATCH v2 05/12] efivars: Parameterize operations Mike Waychison
2011-03-12  1:43 ` [PATCH v2 06/12] efivars: Expose efivars functionality to external drivers Mike Waychison
2011-03-12  1:43 ` [PATCH v2 07/12] efivars: Add Documentation Mike Waychison
2011-03-12  1:43 ` [PATCH v2 08/12] x86: get_bios_ebda_length() Mike Waychison
2011-03-14 15:43   ` Greg KH
2011-03-12  1:43 ` [PATCH v2 09/12] x86: Better comments for get_bios_ebda() Mike Waychison
2011-03-14 15:43   ` Greg KH
2011-03-12  1:43 ` [PATCH v2 10/12] Introduce CONFIG_GOOGLE_FIRMWARE Mike Waychison
2011-03-14 15:45   ` Greg KH
2011-03-14 19:49     ` Mike Waychison
2011-03-14 19:59       ` Greg KH
2011-03-14 20:06         ` Mike Waychison
2011-03-12  1:43 ` [PATCH v2 11/12] driver: Google EFI SMI Mike Waychison
2011-03-14 15:47   ` Greg KH
2011-03-14 20:01     ` Mike Waychison
2011-03-14 20:13       ` Greg KH [this message]
2011-03-14 21:09         ` Mike Waychison
2011-03-14 23:05         ` Alan Cox
2011-03-12  1:43 ` [PATCH v2 12/12] driver: Google Memory Console Mike Waychison
2011-03-14  4:54   ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-03-14  4:58     ` Tim Hockin
2011-03-14  5:02       ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-03-14  9:22         ` Ingo Molnar
2011-03-14 14:01           ` Tim Hockin
2011-03-14 14:23             ` Ingo Molnar
2011-03-14 15:47               ` Greg KH
2011-03-14 20:03     ` Mike Waychison
2011-03-14 22:46       ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-03-12  3:54 ` [PATCH v2 00/12] google firmware support Matt Domsch
2011-03-14 15:42   ` Greg KH

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=20110314201346.GA1084@kroah.com \
    --to=greg@kroah.com \
    --cc=Matt_Domsch@dell.com \
    --cc=adurbin@google.com \
    --cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
    --cc=dlaurie@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mikew@google.com \
    --cc=san@google.com \
    --cc=thockin@google.com \
    --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