Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1374707 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH] platform:x86 decouple telemetry driver from the optional IPC resources

Started byDarren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org>
First post2016-04-10 04:50 +0200
Last post2016-04-11 09:10 +0200
Articles 5 — 4 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH] platform:x86 decouple telemetry driver from the optional  IPC resources Darren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org> - 2016-04-10 04:50 +0200
    RE: [PATCH] platform:x86 decouple telemetry driver from the  optional IPC resources "Zha, Qipeng" <qipeng.zha@intel.com> - 2016-04-11 04:10 +0200
      RE: [PATCH] platform:x86 decouple telemetry driver from the  optional IPC resources "Chakravarty, Souvik K" <souvik.k.chakravarty@intel.com> - 2016-04-11 06:10 +0200
        Re: [PATCH] platform:x86 decouple telemetry driver from the optional  IPC resources Darren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org> - 2016-04-11 09:00 +0200
          Re: [PATCH] platform:x86 decouple telemetry driver from the optional  IPC resources "Li, Aubrey" <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com> - 2016-04-11 09:10 +0200

#1374707 — Re: [PATCH] platform:x86 decouple telemetry driver from the optional IPC resources

FromDarren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org>
Date2016-04-10 04:50 +0200
SubjectRe: [PATCH] platform:x86 decouple telemetry driver from the optional IPC resources
Message-ID<rmdBL-6Fr-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 02:28:09PM -0500, Aubrey Li wrote:
> Currently the optional IPC resources prevent telemetry driver from
> probing if these resources are not in ACPI table. This patch decouples
> telemetry driver from these optional resources, so that telemetry driver
> has dependency only on the necessary ACPI resources.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>

Given the impact to their recent contributions, I'm looking for reviews from
Qipeng and Souvik before I merge this.

Qipeng, as the listed maintainer for these two files, I particularly need to
hear from you.

Thanks,

> ---
>  drivers/platform/x86/intel_pmc_ipc.c   |   48 +++++++++++++++-----------------
>  drivers/platform/x86/intel_punit_ipc.c |   48 +++++++++++++++++++++-----------
>  2 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 42 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/intel_pmc_ipc.c b/drivers/platform/x86/intel_pmc_ipc.c
> index 092519e..29d9c02 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/intel_pmc_ipc.c
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel_pmc_ipc.c
> @@ -686,8 +686,8 @@ static int ipc_plat_get_res(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  	ipcdev.acpi_io_size = size;
>  	dev_info(&pdev->dev, "io res: %pR\n", res);
>  
> -	/* This is index 0 to cover BIOS data register */
>  	punit_res = punit_res_array;
> +	/* This is index 0 to cover BIOS data register */
>  	res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM,
>  				    PLAT_RESOURCE_BIOS_DATA_INDEX);
>  	if (!res) {
> @@ -697,55 +697,51 @@ static int ipc_plat_get_res(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  	*punit_res = *res;
>  	dev_info(&pdev->dev, "punit BIOS data res: %pR\n", res);
>  
> +	/* This is index 1 to cover BIOS interface register */
>  	res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM,
>  				    PLAT_RESOURCE_BIOS_IFACE_INDEX);
>  	if (!res) {
>  		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to get res of punit BIOS iface\n");
>  		return -ENXIO;
>  	}
> -	/* This is index 1 to cover BIOS interface register */
>  	*++punit_res = *res;
>  	dev_info(&pdev->dev, "punit BIOS interface res: %pR\n", res);
>  
> +	/* This is index 2 to cover ISP data register, optional */
>  	res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM,
>  				    PLAT_RESOURCE_ISP_DATA_INDEX);
> -	if (!res) {
> -		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to get res of punit ISP data\n");
> -		return -ENXIO;
> +	++punit_res;
> +	if (res) {
> +		*punit_res = *res;
> +		dev_info(&pdev->dev, "punit ISP data res: %pR\n", res);
>  	}
> -	/* This is index 2 to cover ISP data register */
> -	*++punit_res = *res;
> -	dev_info(&pdev->dev, "punit ISP data res: %pR\n", res);
>  
> +	/* This is index 3 to cover ISP interface register, optional */
>  	res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM,
>  				    PLAT_RESOURCE_ISP_IFACE_INDEX);
> -	if (!res) {
> -		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to get res of punit ISP iface\n");
> -		return -ENXIO;
> +	++punit_res;
> +	if (res) {
> +		*punit_res = *res;
> +		dev_info(&pdev->dev, "punit ISP interface res: %pR\n", res);
>  	}
> -	/* This is index 3 to cover ISP interface register */
> -	*++punit_res = *res;
> -	dev_info(&pdev->dev, "punit ISP interface res: %pR\n", res);
>  
> +	/* This is index 4 to cover GTD data register, optional */
>  	res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM,
>  				    PLAT_RESOURCE_GTD_DATA_INDEX);
> -	if (!res) {
> -		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to get res of punit GTD data\n");
> -		return -ENXIO;
> +	++punit_res;
> +	if (res) {
> +		*punit_res = *res;
> +		dev_info(&pdev->dev, "punit GTD data res: %pR\n", res);
>  	}
> -	/* This is index 4 to cover GTD data register */
> -	*++punit_res = *res;
> -	dev_info(&pdev->dev, "punit GTD data res: %pR\n", res);
>  
> +	/* This is index 5 to cover GTD interface register, optional */
>  	res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM,
>  				    PLAT_RESOURCE_GTD_IFACE_INDEX);
> -	if (!res) {
> -		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to get res of punit GTD iface\n");
> -		return -ENXIO;
> +	++punit_res;
> +	if (res) {
> +		*punit_res = *res;
> +		dev_info(&pdev->dev, "punit GTD interface res: %pR\n", res);
>  	}
> -	/* This is index 5 to cover GTD interface register */
> -	*++punit_res = *res;
> -	dev_info(&pdev->dev, "punit GTD interface res: %pR\n", res);
>  
>  	res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM,
>  				    PLAT_RESOURCE_IPC_INDEX);
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/intel_punit_ipc.c b/drivers/platform/x86/intel_punit_ipc.c
> index bd87540..a47a41f 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/intel_punit_ipc.c
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel_punit_ipc.c
> @@ -227,6 +227,11 @@ static int intel_punit_get_bars(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  	struct resource *res;
>  	void __iomem *addr;
>  
> +	/*
> +	 * The following resources are required
> +	 * - BIOS_IPC BASE_DATA
> +	 * - BIOS_IPC BASE_IFACE
> +	 */
>  	res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
>  	addr = devm_ioremap_resource(&pdev->dev, res);
>  	if (IS_ERR(addr))
> @@ -239,29 +244,40 @@ static int intel_punit_get_bars(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  		return PTR_ERR(addr);
>  	punit_ipcdev->base[BIOS_IPC][BASE_IFACE] = addr;
>  
> +	/*
> +	 * The following resources are optional
> +	 * - ISPDRIVER_IPC BASE_DATA
> +	 * - ISPDRIVER_IPC BASE_IFACE
> +	 * - GTDRIVER_IPC BASE_DATA
> +	 * - GTDRIVER_IPC BASE_IFACE
> +	 */
>  	res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 2);
> -	addr = devm_ioremap_resource(&pdev->dev, res);
> -	if (IS_ERR(addr))
> -		return PTR_ERR(addr);
> -	punit_ipcdev->base[ISPDRIVER_IPC][BASE_DATA] = addr;
> +	if (res) {
> +		addr = devm_ioremap_resource(&pdev->dev, res);
> +		if (!IS_ERR(addr))
> +			punit_ipcdev->base[ISPDRIVER_IPC][BASE_DATA] = addr;
> +	}
>  
>  	res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 3);
> -	addr = devm_ioremap_resource(&pdev->dev, res);
> -	if (IS_ERR(addr))
> -		return PTR_ERR(addr);
> -	punit_ipcdev->base[ISPDRIVER_IPC][BASE_IFACE] = addr;
> +	if (res) {
> +		addr = devm_ioremap_resource(&pdev->dev, res);
> +		if (!IS_ERR(addr))
> +			punit_ipcdev->base[ISPDRIVER_IPC][BASE_IFACE] = addr;
> +	}
>  
>  	res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 4);
> -	addr = devm_ioremap_resource(&pdev->dev, res);
> -	if (IS_ERR(addr))
> -		return PTR_ERR(addr);
> -	punit_ipcdev->base[GTDRIVER_IPC][BASE_DATA] = addr;
> +	if (res) {
> +		addr = devm_ioremap_resource(&pdev->dev, res);
> +		if (!IS_ERR(addr))
> +			punit_ipcdev->base[GTDRIVER_IPC][BASE_DATA] = addr;
> +	}
>  
>  	res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 5);
> -	addr = devm_ioremap_resource(&pdev->dev, res);
> -	if (IS_ERR(addr))
> -		return PTR_ERR(addr);
> -	punit_ipcdev->base[GTDRIVER_IPC][BASE_IFACE] = addr;
> +	if (res) {
> +		addr = devm_ioremap_resource(&pdev->dev, res);
> +		if (!IS_ERR(addr))
> +			punit_ipcdev->base[GTDRIVER_IPC][BASE_IFACE] = addr;
> +	}
>  
>  	return 0;
>  }
> -- 
> 1.7.10.4
> 
> 

-- 
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1375415 — RE: [PATCH] platform:x86 decouple telemetry driver from the optional IPC resources

From"Zha, Qipeng" <qipeng.zha@intel.com>
Date2016-04-11 04:10 +0200
SubjectRE: [PATCH] platform:x86 decouple telemetry driver from the optional IPC resources
Message-ID<rmzsC-6Cj-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1374707
>> Currently the optional IPC resources prevent telemetry driver from 
>> probing if these resources are not in ACPI table. This patch decouples 
>> telemetry driver from these optional resources, so that telemetry 
>> driver has dependency only on the necessary ACPI resources.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>

>Given the impact to their recent contributions, I'm looking for reviews from Qipeng and Souvik before I merge this.

>Qipeng, as the listed maintainer for these two files, I particularly need to hear from you.

>Thanks,

Hi Darren,  I think this is a reasonable solution for such issue.
Thanks Aubrey for this fixing patch.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1375469 — RE: [PATCH] platform:x86 decouple telemetry driver from the optional IPC resources

From"Chakravarty, Souvik K" <souvik.k.chakravarty@intel.com>
Date2016-04-11 06:10 +0200
SubjectRE: [PATCH] platform:x86 decouple telemetry driver from the optional IPC resources
Message-ID<rmBkK-88x-15@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1375415

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Zha, Qipeng
> Sent: Monday, April 11, 2016 7:34 AM
> To: Darren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org>; Aubrey Li
> <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>; Chakravarty, Souvik K
> <souvik.k.chakravarty@intel.com>
> Cc: platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH] platform:x86 decouple telemetry driver from the
> optional IPC resources
> 
> >> Currently the optional IPC resources prevent telemetry driver from
> >> probing if these resources are not in ACPI table. This patch
> >> decouples telemetry driver from these optional resources, so that
> >> telemetry driver has dependency only on the necessary ACPI resources.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>
> 
> >Given the impact to their recent contributions, I'm looking for reviews from
> Qipeng and Souvik before I merge this.
> 
> >Qipeng, as the listed maintainer for these two files, I particularly need to
> hear from you.
> 
> >Thanks,
> 
> Hi Darren,  I think this is a reasonable solution for such issue.
> Thanks Aubrey for this fixing patch.

We went over this internally once. So OK from my POV.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1375526

FromDarren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org>
Date2016-04-11 09:00 +0200
Message-ID<rmDZg-1wB-11@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1375469
On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 04:04:55AM +0000, Chakravarty, Souvik K wrote:
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Zha, Qipeng
> > Sent: Monday, April 11, 2016 7:34 AM
> > To: Darren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org>; Aubrey Li
> > <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>; Chakravarty, Souvik K
> > <souvik.k.chakravarty@intel.com>
> > Cc: platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> > Subject: RE: [PATCH] platform:x86 decouple telemetry driver from the
> > optional IPC resources
> > 
> > >> Currently the optional IPC resources prevent telemetry driver from
> > >> probing if these resources are not in ACPI table. This patch
> > >> decouples telemetry driver from these optional resources, so that
> > >> telemetry driver has dependency only on the necessary ACPI resources.
> > >>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>
> > 
> > >Given the impact to their recent contributions, I'm looking for reviews from
> > Qipeng and Souvik before I merge this.
> > 
> > >Qipeng, as the listed maintainer for these two files, I particularly need to
> > hear from you.
> > 
> > >Thanks,
> > 
> > Hi Darren,  I think this is a reasonable solution for such issue.
> > Thanks Aubrey for this fixing patch.
> 
> We went over this internally once. So OK from my POV.

Qipeng and Souvik, I appreciate the responses.

As a point of process, I won't include a "Reviewed-by:" unless you explicitly
include it in your response.

-- 
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1375531

From"Li, Aubrey" <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>
Date2016-04-11 09:10 +0200
Message-ID<rmE8V-1RJ-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1375526
On 2016/4/11 14:48, Darren Hart wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 04:04:55AM +0000, Chakravarty, Souvik K wrote:
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Zha, Qipeng
>>> Sent: Monday, April 11, 2016 7:34 AM
>>> To: Darren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org>; Aubrey Li
>>> <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>; Chakravarty, Souvik K
>>> <souvik.k.chakravarty@intel.com>
>>> Cc: platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
>>> Subject: RE: [PATCH] platform:x86 decouple telemetry driver from the
>>> optional IPC resources
>>>
>>>>> Currently the optional IPC resources prevent telemetry driver from
>>>>> probing if these resources are not in ACPI table. This patch
>>>>> decouples telemetry driver from these optional resources, so that
>>>>> telemetry driver has dependency only on the necessary ACPI resources.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>
>>>
>>>> Given the impact to their recent contributions, I'm looking for reviews from
>>> Qipeng and Souvik before I merge this.
>>>
>>>> Qipeng, as the listed maintainer for these two files, I particularly need to
>>> hear from you.
>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Hi Darren,  I think this is a reasonable solution for such issue.
>>> Thanks Aubrey for this fixing patch.
>>
>> We went over this internally once. So OK from my POV.
> 
> Qipeng and Souvik, I appreciate the responses.


Thank you all. -Aubrey
> 
> As a point of process, I won't include a "Reviewed-by:" unless you explicitly
> include it in your response.
>

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web