Re: [PATCH] mfd: intel-m10-bmc: Change staging size to a variable

[Colberg, Peter]

On Tue, 2024-04-02 at 14:52 +0800, Xu Yilun wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 01, 2024 at 10:19:47AM -0700, Russ Weight wrote:
> > 
> > On Mon, Apr 01, 2024 at 10:09:05AM -0700, Russ Weight wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 01, 2024 at 05:46:29PM +0800, Xu Yilun wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 07:35:59PM -0400, Peter Colberg wrote:
> > > > > From: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > 
> > > > > The size of the staging area in FLASH for FPGA updates is dependent on the
> > > > > size of the FPGA. Currently, the staging size is defined as a constant.
> > > > > Larger FPGAs are coming soon and it will soon be necessary to support
> > > > 
> > > > Soon? When? You cannot add some feature without a user case. If you do
> > > > have a use case, put the patch in the same patchset.
> > > 
> > > There may never be an up-streamed use-case. This is a very small
> > > change intended to make it easier for a third-party vendor to
> > > build a card that requires a larger staging area in FLASH. They
> > > would have to add a new "struct m10bmc_csr_map", but they
> > > wouldn't have to refactor this code as part of the change
> 
> I'm OK with this description.
> 
> Peter, is that what you mean?

Yes.

> Or you do have a board type to follow, in
> which case you need to submit the new board type as well.
> 
> > > 
> > > This change does not introduce an unused function or variable.
> > > It is more of a clean-up, making the code more flexible.
> > > 
> > > Can it not be taken as is?
> > 
> > Would it be acceptable to just change the commit message to something
> > like:
> > 
> > Do not hardwire the staging size in the secure update driver. Move
> > the staging size to the m10bmc_csr_map structure to make the size
> > assignment more flexible.
> 
> That would be much better.

Thanks Russ, thanks Yilun, I will send a revised patch.

Peter

> 
> Thanks,
> Yilun