RE: [patch v1] x86/platform/mellanox: introduce support for Mellanox systems platform

[Vadim Pasternak]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Greg KH [mailto:gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 11:12 AM
> To: Vadim Pasternak <vadimp@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>; Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-
> m68k.org>; tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; mingo@xxxxxxxxxx; hpa@xxxxxxxxx;
> davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> mchehab@xxxxxxxxxx; linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx; x86@xxxxxxxxxx; linux-
> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; platform-driver-x86@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; jiri@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [patch v1] x86/platform/mellanox: introduce support for Mellanox
> systems platform
> 
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 07:27:20AM +0000, Vadim Pasternak wrote:
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Ingo Molnar [mailto:mingo.kernel.org@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> > > Ingo Molnar
> > > Sent: Monday, September 12, 2016 2:01 PM
> > > To: Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Vadim Pasternak
> > > <vadimp@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; mingo@xxxxxxxxxx;
> > > hpa@xxxxxxxxx; davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > > kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; mchehab@xxxxxxxxxx; linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > > x86@xxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; platform-driver-
> > > x86@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; jiri@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: Re: [patch v1] x86/platform/mellanox: introduce support for
> > > Mellanox systems platform
> > >
> > >
> > > * Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 11:14:26AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 10:34 AM, Greg KH
> > > > > <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >> This is LPC to I2C bridge.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "LPC"?
> > > > >
> > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_Pin_Count
> > > > >
> > > > > "Modern ISA"
> > > >
> > > > So my original point stands, 1990's technology being used for
> > > > brand new devices today, ugh :(
> > > >
> > > > Someone needs to go kick some hardware designers...
> > >
> > > In their defense, "this is a carbon copy of published 1990s
> > > technology" is a pretty good starting point for a defendant, in patent
> litigation.
> > >
> >
> > I understood your comments regarding undiscoverable busses.
> > But we use LPC on all our x86 based systems.
> > I have to activate all platform related stuff from some place and we
> > don't support ACPI.
> 
> x86 that doesn't support ACPI?  That's sad :(

Yes.
But we should make a decision for the coming platform - to provide ACPI support for board specific stuff, or equip the new systems with BMC (so we'll introduce all board related stuff through DTS).
But currently this is our reality. Me also sad.

> 
> > Do you think it would be OK, if I'll remove all PCI related code, make
> > use of DMI and leave only platform activation code?
> > If yes, I'll re-work this driver and re-send it for your review.
> 
> Yes, that sounds like a good start, let's see how the code looks after doing that.

Sure. I'll do it.
Thank you very much for your comments.

Thanks,

Vadim
> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h