Re: [PATCH v1] x86/amd_nb: Add new PCI IDs for AMD family 0x1a model 60h

[Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@amd.com>]

On Thu, Jul 18, 2024 at 10:19:47PM +0530, Shyam Sundar S K wrote:
> 
> 
> On 7/18/2024 21:13, Yazen Ghannam wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 18, 2024 at 07:32:58PM +0530, Shyam Sundar S K wrote:
> >> Add the new PCI Device IDs to the root IDs and misc ids list to support
> >> new generation of AMD 1Ah family 60h Models of processors.
> > 
> > Please be consistent with formatting.
> > 
> > "Device" -> "device"
> > 
> > "misc ids" -> "misc IDs" 
> > 
> > "Models" -> "models"
> > 
> > Also, you have "0x1A"  in the $SUBJECT, but you have "1Ah" in the commit
> > message. I suggest staying with "1Ah" as that is the format used in AMD
> > documentation.
> > 
> > And "v1" is not necessary in the "[PATCH]" prefix.
> > 
> > Furthermore, if you CC the "x86" alias, then you don't need to CC the
> > individual x86 maintainers.
> 
> I used get_maintainer.pl to send it. I can remove individual names and
> send it only to the x86 maintainers.
> 

Understood. I think this only applies to those who are listed as
maintainers: "maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)"

They are already included by "x86@kernel.org", so copying them
individually is redundant. At least, that is the feedback I have
received previously.

For reference, please see "x86 architecture" here:
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/maintainer-tip.html

> > 
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Shyam Sundar S K <Shyam-sundar.S-k@amd.com>
> >> ---
> >> (As the amd_nb functions are used by PMC and PMF drivers, without these IDs
> >> being present AMD PMF/PMC probe shall fail.)
> > 
> > This comment can go in the commit message. Otherwise, it'll be lost from
> > the git history.
> > 
> > The comment is helpful in that it gives a reason *why* these new IDs are
> > needed.
> > 
> 
> My previous commit 0e640f0a47d8 ("x86/amd_nb: Add new PCI IDs for AMD
> family 0x1a") included this note in the commit message, but Boris had
> to trim it. Therefore, I excluded it this time.
> 
> Should I include or exclude this note?
>

I see. In that case, you can exclude the note unless there is more
feedback from others.

Thanks,
Yazen