Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] platform: Add ARM64 platform directory

[Nikita Travkin]

Ilpo Järvinen писал(а) 12.03.2024 16:40:
> On Tue, 12 Mar 2024, Nikita Travkin wrote:
> 
>> Some ARM64 based laptops and computers require vendor/board specific
>> drivers for their embedded controllers. Even though usually the most
>> important functionality of those devices is implemented inside ACPI,
>> unfortunately Linux doesn't currently have great support for ACPI on
>> platforms like Qualcomm Snapdragon that are used in most ARM64 laptops
>> today. Instead Linux relies on Device Tree for Qualcomm based devices
>> and it's significantly easier to reimplement the EC functionality in
>> a dedicated driver than to make use of ACPI code.
>>
>> This commit introduces a new platform/arm64 subdirectory to give a
>> place to such drivers for EC-like devices.
>>
>> A new MAINTAINERS entry is added for this directory. Patches to files in
>> this directory will be taken up by the platform-drivers-x86 team (i.e.
>> Hans de Goede and Mark Gross).
> 
> Mark -> me.

Oops, copied without noticing that, sorry, will reword.

> 
>> +ARM64 PLATFORM DRIVERS
>> +M:	Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> +M:	Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> +L:	platform-driver-x86@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> +S:	Maintained
>> +Q:	https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/platform-driver-x86/list/
>> +T:	git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/pdx86/platform-drivers-x86.git
>> +F:	drivers/platform/arm64/
> 
> Is some ARM64 person going to pay attention to these patches (you or 
> perhaps somebody else)?
> 
> It's perfectly fine to have some ARM64 person(s) listed as an additional 
> maintainer there even if the patches themselves are routed through Hans 
> and me (and pdx86 tree). With Mellanox and Surface platform drivers which 
> are also routed through pdx86 tree, we have Hans + me + 3rd person listed 
> as maintainers.
> 
> (This is not to force anything on anyone but it could be beneficial if 
> somebody more familiar with ARM64 is in the loop.)

I've just replied to Bryan with my thoughts on this, but if you think
explicit arm list would be good here, we could indeed add linux-arm-msm
for now as Bryan suggested.

Nikita