Re: [PATCH V2 RESEND] soc: loongson: add Loongson Security Module driver

[Zhao Qunqin]

在 2024/12/28 下午7:02, Krzysztof Kozlowski 写道:
> On 24/12/2024 08:25, Qunqin Zhao wrote:
> > This driver supports Loongson Security Module, which
> > provides the control for it's hardware encryption
> > acceleration child devices.
> Please wrap commit message according to Linux coding style / submission
> process (neither too early nor over the limit):
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.4-rc1/source/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst#L597
OK
> > Only ACPI firmware is supported.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Qunqin Zhao <zhaoqunqin@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> I don't get why you are sending this to soc. This is loongson specific
> and is supposed to go via Loongson maintainers.
>
> And why is this a resend?

There are no platform-specific maintainers, So I initially sent the 
patch to Arnd,

but didn't receive a response from Arnold, so I resent the patch and added

soc@xxxxxxxxxx to the mailing list.

> > ---
> > Changes in v2:
> > 	- Removed useless memset() in probe.
> > 	- Cleaned up coding style.
> > 	- Corrected the spelling.
> >
> >   MAINTAINERS                        |   7 +
> >   drivers/soc/loongson/Kconfig       |   9 +
> >   drivers/soc/loongson/Makefile      |   1 +
> >   drivers/soc/loongson/loongson_se.c | 523 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >   include/soc/loongson/se.h          | 135 ++++++++
>
> include/linux/soc/... or just keep it private to the driver. Why this
> has to be exposed to other users?

Looks like  include/linux/soc... is more suitable than include/soc/...

This driver is the base of other users,  one user will be added in next 
revision.

And may I ask which one do you think is more suitable to place this 
basic driver under SOC or MFD ?


Thanks.

> Best regards,
> Krzysztof