The Linux Kernel Mailing List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
To: Ed W <lists@wildgooses.com>,
	"Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <lkml@metux.net>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: fe@dev.tdt.de, "Enrico Weigelt,
	metux IT consult" <info@metux.net>,
	Darren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org>,
	Andy Shevchenko <andy@infradead.org>,
	platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86: Remove led/gpio setup from pcengines platform driver
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2020 13:29:39 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <d0d91191-cad2-94a1-6373-0f3ff4e38376@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e953f3ee-2db1-1523-cd84-6acb26751a15@wildgooses.com>

Hi,

On 10/14/20 1:21 PM, Ed W wrote:
> On 14/10/2020 09:41, Hans de Goede wrote:
>>
>> So I have a suggested compromise:
>>
>> Keep the current LED/gpio setup code, but make executing it conditional
>> on the BIOS version and skip the LED/gpio setup when the new BIOS is
>> present to avoid having duplicate LED entries, etc. in that case.
>>
>> I guess this would still break userspace because if I understand things
>> correctly the new ACPI based setup uses different LED names ? That
>> seems unfortunate, but I guess that from the kernel pov we can just
>> blame the BIOS for this, and since we definitely do not want duplicate
>> LED entries for the same LED, this seems the least bad choice.
>>
>> Enrico, would that work for you ?
> 
> 
> I'm cool with this. Enrico?
> 
> I may have some time imminently to have a stab at a new patch. Obviously any help structuring this
> would be appreciated - it feels clumsy using the existing detection mechanism, I think whatever I
> come up with you should kick back and recommend a new board detection structure, but perhaps we can
> shortcut that step with a few comments up front?

I'm afraid I do not have any wisdom to share here. I would use the DMI bios-version
or bios-date strings for the detection, but I guess that is obvious.

Other then I guess I would do a preparation patch restructuring the code so that
the whole conditional part becomes a single if, e.g.:

	if (old_bios()) {
		ret = register_leds_and_gpio_for_old_bios()
		if (ret)
			goto error_cleanup;
	}

So in a separate preparation commit put all the code which you tried to
remove earlier in a single helper function (feel free to pick a different name).

And then in that prep patch the above would look like this:

	ret = register_leds_and_gpio_for_old_bios()
	if (ret)
		goto error_cleanup;

And a follow-up commit adding the new/old bios detection would
introduce the if.

And do the same for the cleanup parts for module unloading.

I hope this helps...

Regards,

Hans


  reply	other threads:[~2020-10-14 11:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-09-21 21:59 [PATCH 1/2] x86: Remove led/gpio setup from pcengines platform driver Ed Wildgoose
2020-09-21 21:59 ` [PATCH 2/2] x86: Support APU5 in PCEngines " Ed Wildgoose
2020-09-21 22:17 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86: Remove led/gpio setup from pcengines " Ed W
2020-10-12 19:39   ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
2020-10-13  8:48     ` Hans de Goede
2020-10-13 21:46       ` Ed W
2020-10-19 14:28         ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
2020-10-13 21:40     ` Ed W
2020-10-14  8:41       ` Hans de Goede
2020-10-14 11:21         ` Ed W
2020-10-14 11:29           ` Hans de Goede [this message]
2020-10-21 21:54             ` Ed W
2020-10-22 11:48               ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
2020-10-22 15:10                 ` Ed W
2020-10-22 19:30                   ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
2020-10-19 15:44         ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
2020-10-19 18:37           ` Hans de Goede
2020-10-21 12:18             ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
2020-10-21 21:41             ` [PATCH 1/2] x86: Conditional init of pcengines leds/keys gpios Ed Wildgoose
2020-10-21 21:41               ` [PATCH 2/2] x86: Support APU5 & APU6 in PCEngines platform driver Ed Wildgoose
2020-10-22  0:53               ` [PATCH 1/2] x86: Conditional init of pcengines leds/keys gpios kernel test robot
2020-10-22  9:22               ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
2020-10-22  9:38                 ` Ed W
2020-10-22 13:20                   ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
2020-10-22 12:23               ` kernel test robot
2020-10-22 12:23               ` [RFC PATCH] x86: cmp_version() can be static kernel test robot
2020-10-19 16:33       ` [PATCH 1/2] x86: Remove led/gpio setup from pcengines platform driver Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
2020-10-12 19:31 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult

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=d0d91191-cad2-94a1-6373-0f3ff4e38376@redhat.com \
    --to=hdegoede@redhat.com \
    --cc=andy@infradead.org \
    --cc=dvhart@infradead.org \
    --cc=fe@dev.tdt.de \
    --cc=info@metux.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lists@wildgooses.com \
    --cc=lkml@metux.net \
    --cc=platform-driver-x86@vger.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