Hello,
This series is a bit of a mix of things, but its primary purpose is to
expose BMC KCS IPMI devices to userspace in a way that enables userspace
to talk to host firmware using protocols that are not IPMI.
v1 can be found here:
https://lore.kernel.org/openbmc/[email protected]/
Changes in v2 include:
* A rebase onto v5.12-rc2
* Incorporation of off-list feedback on SerIRQ configuration from
Chiawei
* Further validation on hardware for ASPEED KCS devices 2, 3 and 4
* Lifting the existing single-open constraint of the IPMI chardev
* Fixes addressing Rob's feedback on the conversion of the ASPEED KCS
binding to dt-schema
* Fixes addressing Rob's feedback on the new aspeed,lpc-interrupts
property definition for the ASPEED KCS binding
A new chardev device is added whose implementation exposes the Input
Data Register (IDR), Output Data Register (ODR) and Status Register
(STR) via read() and write(), and implements poll() for event
monitoring.
The existing /dev/ipmi-kcs* chardev interface exposes the KCS devices in
a way which encoded the IPMI protocol in its behaviour. However, as
LPC[0] KCS devices give us bi-directional interrupts between the host
and a BMC with both a data and status byte, they are useful for purposes
beyond IPMI.
As a concrete example, libmctp[1] implements a vendor-defined MCTP[2]
binding using a combination of LPC Firmware cycles for bulk data
transfer and a KCS device via LPC IO cycles for out-of-band protocol
control messages[3]. This gives a throughput improvement over the
standard KCS binding[4] while continuing to exploit the ease of setup of
the LPC bus for early boot firmware on the host processor.
The series takes a bit of a winding path to achieve its aim:
1. It begins with patches 1-5 put together by Chia-Wei, which I've
rebased on v5.12-rc2. These fix the ASPEED LPC bindings and other
non-KCS LPC-related ASPEED device drivers in a way that enables the
SerIRQ patches at the end of the series. With Joel's review I'm hoping
these 5 can go through the aspeed tree, and that the rest can go through
the IPMI tree.
2. Next, patches 6-13 fairly heavily refactor the KCS support in the
IPMI part of the tree, re-architecting things such that it's possible to
support multiple chardev implementations sitting on top of the ASPEED
and Nuvoton device drivers. However, the KCS code didn't really have
great separation of concerns as it stood, so even if we disregard the
multiple-chardev support I think the cleanups are worthwhile.
3. Patch 14 adds some interrupt management capabilities to the KCS
device drivers in preparation for patch 16, which introduces the new
"raw" KCS device interface. I'm not stoked about the device name/path,
so if people are looking to bikeshed something then feel free to lay
into that.
4. The remaining patches switch the ASPEED KCS devicetree binding to
dt-schema, add a new interrupt property to describe the SerIRQ behaviour
of the device and finally clean up Serial IRQ support in the ASPEED KCS
driver.
Rob: The dt-binding patches still come before the relevant driver
changes, I tried to keep the two close together in the series, hence the
bindings changes not being patches 1 and 2.
I've exercised the series under qemu with the rainier-bmc machine plus
additional patches for KCS support[5]. I've also substituted this series in
place of a hacky out-of-tree driver that we've been using for the
libmctp stack and successfully booted the host processor under our
internal full-platform simulation tools for a Rainier system.
Note that this work touches the Nuvoton driver as well as ASPEED's, but
I don't have the capability to test those changes or the IPMI chardev
path. Tested-by tags would be much appreciated if you can exercise one
or both.
Please review!
Andrew
[0] https://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/program/design/us/en/documents/low-pin-count-interface-specification.pdf
[1] https://github.com/openbmc/libmctp/
[2] https://www.dmtf.org/sites/default/files/standards/documents/DSP0236_1.3.1.pdf
[3] https://github.com/openbmc/libmctp/blob/master/docs/bindings/vendor-astlpc.md
[4] https://www.dmtf.org/sites/default/files/standards/documents/DSP0254_1.0.0.pdf
[5] https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/[email protected]/
Andrew Jeffery (16):
ipmi: kcs_bmc_aspeed: Use of match data to extract KCS properties
ipmi: kcs_bmc: Make status update atomic
ipmi: kcs_bmc: Rename {read,write}_{status,data}() functions
ipmi: kcs_bmc: Split out kcs_bmc_cdev_ipmi
ipmi: kcs_bmc: Turn the driver data-structures inside-out
ipmi: kcs_bmc: Split headers into device and client
ipmi: kcs_bmc: Strip private client data from struct kcs_bmc
ipmi: kcs_bmc: Decouple the IPMI chardev from the core
ipmi: kcs_bmc: Allow clients to control KCS IRQ state
ipmi: kcs_bmc: Don't enforce single-open policy in the kernel
ipmi: kcs_bmc: Add a "raw" character device interface
dt-bindings: ipmi: Convert ASPEED KCS binding to schema
dt-bindings: ipmi: Add optional SerIRQ property to ASPEED KCS devices
ipmi: kcs_bmc_aspeed: Implement KCS SerIRQ configuration
ipmi: kcs_bmc_aspeed: Fix IBFIE typo from datasheet
ipmi: kcs_bmc_aspeed: Optionally apply status address
Chia-Wei, Wang (5):
dt-bindings: aspeed-lpc: Remove LPC partitioning
ARM: dts: Remove LPC BMC and Host partitions
ipmi: kcs: aspeed: Adapt to new LPC DTS layout
pinctrl: aspeed-g5: Adapt to new LPC device tree layout
soc: aspeed: Adapt to new LPC device tree layout
Documentation/ABI/testing/dev-raw-kcs | 25 +
.../bindings/ipmi/aspeed,ast2400-kcs-bmc.yaml | 106 +++
.../bindings/ipmi/aspeed-kcs-bmc.txt | 33 -
.../devicetree/bindings/mfd/aspeed-lpc.txt | 100 +--
arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed-g4.dtsi | 70 +-
arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed-g5.dtsi | 121 ++--
arch/arm/boot/dts/aspeed-g6.dtsi | 123 ++--
drivers/char/ipmi/Kconfig | 30 +
drivers/char/ipmi/Makefile | 2 +
drivers/char/ipmi/kcs_bmc.c | 534 ++++----------
drivers/char/ipmi/kcs_bmc.h | 94 +--
drivers/char/ipmi/kcs_bmc_aspeed.c | 663 +++++++++++++-----
drivers/char/ipmi/kcs_bmc_cdev_ipmi.c | 570 +++++++++++++++
drivers/char/ipmi/kcs_bmc_cdev_raw.c | 443 ++++++++++++
drivers/char/ipmi/kcs_bmc_client.h | 47 ++
drivers/char/ipmi/kcs_bmc_device.h | 20 +
drivers/char/ipmi/kcs_bmc_npcm7xx.c | 97 ++-
drivers/pinctrl/aspeed/pinctrl-aspeed-g5.c | 17 +-
drivers/soc/aspeed/aspeed-lpc-ctrl.c | 20 +-
drivers/soc/aspeed/aspeed-lpc-snoop.c | 23 +-
20 files changed, 2132 insertions(+), 1006 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 Documentation/ABI/testing/dev-raw-kcs
create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ipmi/aspeed,ast2400-kcs-bmc.yaml
delete mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ipmi/aspeed-kcs-bmc.txt
create mode 100644 drivers/char/ipmi/kcs_bmc_cdev_ipmi.c
create mode 100644 drivers/char/ipmi/kcs_bmc_cdev_raw.c
create mode 100644 drivers/char/ipmi/kcs_bmc_client.h
create mode 100644 drivers/char/ipmi/kcs_bmc_device.h
--
2.27.0
On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 01:19:30AM CDT, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
>Hello,
>
>This series is a bit of a mix of things, but its primary purpose is to
>expose BMC KCS IPMI devices to userspace in a way that enables userspace
>to talk to host firmware using protocols that are not IPMI.
>
>v1 can be found here:
>
>https://lore.kernel.org/openbmc/[email protected]/
>
>Changes in v2 include:
>
>* A rebase onto v5.12-rc2
>* Incorporation of off-list feedback on SerIRQ configuration from
> Chiawei
>* Further validation on hardware for ASPEED KCS devices 2, 3 and 4
>* Lifting the existing single-open constraint of the IPMI chardev
>* Fixes addressing Rob's feedback on the conversion of the ASPEED KCS
> binding to dt-schema
>* Fixes addressing Rob's feedback on the new aspeed,lpc-interrupts
> property definition for the ASPEED KCS binding
>
>A new chardev device is added whose implementation exposes the Input
>Data Register (IDR), Output Data Register (ODR) and Status Register
>(STR) via read() and write(), and implements poll() for event
>monitoring.
>
>The existing /dev/ipmi-kcs* chardev interface exposes the KCS devices in
>a way which encoded the IPMI protocol in its behaviour. However, as
>LPC[0] KCS devices give us bi-directional interrupts between the host
>and a BMC with both a data and status byte, they are useful for purposes
>beyond IPMI.
>
>As a concrete example, libmctp[1] implements a vendor-defined MCTP[2]
>binding using a combination of LPC Firmware cycles for bulk data
>transfer and a KCS device via LPC IO cycles for out-of-band protocol
>control messages[3]. This gives a throughput improvement over the
>standard KCS binding[4] while continuing to exploit the ease of setup of
>the LPC bus for early boot firmware on the host processor.
>
>The series takes a bit of a winding path to achieve its aim:
>
>1. It begins with patches 1-5 put together by Chia-Wei, which I've
>rebased on v5.12-rc2. These fix the ASPEED LPC bindings and other
>non-KCS LPC-related ASPEED device drivers in a way that enables the
>SerIRQ patches at the end of the series. With Joel's review I'm hoping
>these 5 can go through the aspeed tree, and that the rest can go through
>the IPMI tree.
>
>2. Next, patches 6-13 fairly heavily refactor the KCS support in the
>IPMI part of the tree, re-architecting things such that it's possible to
>support multiple chardev implementations sitting on top of the ASPEED
>and Nuvoton device drivers. However, the KCS code didn't really have
>great separation of concerns as it stood, so even if we disregard the
>multiple-chardev support I think the cleanups are worthwhile.
>
>3. Patch 14 adds some interrupt management capabilities to the KCS
>device drivers in preparation for patch 16, which introduces the new
>"raw" KCS device interface. I'm not stoked about the device name/path,
>so if people are looking to bikeshed something then feel free to lay
>into that.
>
>4. The remaining patches switch the ASPEED KCS devicetree binding to
>dt-schema, add a new interrupt property to describe the SerIRQ behaviour
>of the device and finally clean up Serial IRQ support in the ASPEED KCS
>driver.
>
>Rob: The dt-binding patches still come before the relevant driver
>changes, I tried to keep the two close together in the series, hence the
>bindings changes not being patches 1 and 2.
>
>I've exercised the series under qemu with the rainier-bmc machine plus
>additional patches for KCS support[5]. I've also substituted this series in
>place of a hacky out-of-tree driver that we've been using for the
>libmctp stack and successfully booted the host processor under our
>internal full-platform simulation tools for a Rainier system.
>
>Note that this work touches the Nuvoton driver as well as ASPEED's, but
>I don't have the capability to test those changes or the IPMI chardev
>path. Tested-by tags would be much appreciated if you can exercise one
>or both.
>
>Please review!
>
>Andrew
>
After rebasing the series onto the OpenBMC dev-5.10 kernel (with only a
tiny conflict for the addition of the ast2600 entry in
ast_kcs_bmc_match) and enabling CONFIG_IPMI_KCS_BMC_CDEV_IPMI, my
e3c246d4i system booted healthily and handled some basic ipmitool
operations as expected.
Tested-by: Zev Weiss <[email protected]>
Zev
Hi Corey,
On Fri, 19 Mar 2021, at 16:49, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
> Hello,
>
> This series is a bit of a mix of things, but its primary purpose is to
> expose BMC KCS IPMI devices to userspace in a way that enables userspace
> to talk to host firmware using protocols that are not IPMI.
>
> v1 can be found here:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/openbmc/[email protected]/
>
> Changes in v2 include:
>
> * A rebase onto v5.12-rc2
> * Incorporation of off-list feedback on SerIRQ configuration from
> Chiawei
> * Further validation on hardware for ASPEED KCS devices 2, 3 and 4
> * Lifting the existing single-open constraint of the IPMI chardev
> * Fixes addressing Rob's feedback on the conversion of the ASPEED KCS
> binding to dt-schema
> * Fixes addressing Rob's feedback on the new aspeed,lpc-interrupts
> property definition for the ASPEED KCS binding
>
> A new chardev device is added whose implementation exposes the Input
> Data Register (IDR), Output Data Register (ODR) and Status Register
> (STR) via read() and write(), and implements poll() for event
> monitoring.
>
> The existing /dev/ipmi-kcs* chardev interface exposes the KCS devices in
> a way which encoded the IPMI protocol in its behaviour. However, as
> LPC[0] KCS devices give us bi-directional interrupts between the host
> and a BMC with both a data and status byte, they are useful for purposes
> beyond IPMI.
>
> As a concrete example, libmctp[1] implements a vendor-defined MCTP[2]
> binding using a combination of LPC Firmware cycles for bulk data
> transfer and a KCS device via LPC IO cycles for out-of-band protocol
> control messages[3]. This gives a throughput improvement over the
> standard KCS binding[4] while continuing to exploit the ease of setup of
> the LPC bus for early boot firmware on the host processor.
>
> The series takes a bit of a winding path to achieve its aim:
>
> 1. It begins with patches 1-5 put together by Chia-Wei, which I've
> rebased on v5.12-rc2. These fix the ASPEED LPC bindings and other
> non-KCS LPC-related ASPEED device drivers in a way that enables the
> SerIRQ patches at the end of the series. With Joel's review I'm hoping
> these 5 can go through the aspeed tree, and that the rest can go through
> the IPMI tree.
>
> 2. Next, patches 6-13 fairly heavily refactor the KCS support in the
> IPMI part of the tree, re-architecting things such that it's possible to
> support multiple chardev implementations sitting on top of the ASPEED
> and Nuvoton device drivers. However, the KCS code didn't really have
> great separation of concerns as it stood, so even if we disregard the
> multiple-chardev support I think the cleanups are worthwhile.
>
> 3. Patch 14 adds some interrupt management capabilities to the KCS
> device drivers in preparation for patch 16, which introduces the new
> "raw" KCS device interface. I'm not stoked about the device name/path,
> so if people are looking to bikeshed something then feel free to lay
> into that.
>
> 4. The remaining patches switch the ASPEED KCS devicetree binding to
> dt-schema, add a new interrupt property to describe the SerIRQ behaviour
> of the device and finally clean up Serial IRQ support in the ASPEED KCS
> driver.
>
> Rob: The dt-binding patches still come before the relevant driver
> changes, I tried to keep the two close together in the series, hence the
> bindings changes not being patches 1 and 2.
>
> I've exercised the series under qemu with the rainier-bmc machine plus
> additional patches for KCS support[5]. I've also substituted this series in
> place of a hacky out-of-tree driver that we've been using for the
> libmctp stack and successfully booted the host processor under our
> internal full-platform simulation tools for a Rainier system.
>
> Note that this work touches the Nuvoton driver as well as ASPEED's, but
> I don't have the capability to test those changes or the IPMI chardev
> path. Tested-by tags would be much appreciated if you can exercise one
> or both.
>
> Please review!
Unfortunately the cover letter got detached from the rest of the series.
Any chance you can take a look at the patches?
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/[email protected]/
Cheers,
Andrew
On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 10:27:46AM +0930, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
> Hi Corey,
>
> On Fri, 19 Mar 2021, at 16:49, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > This series is a bit of a mix of things, but its primary purpose is to
> > expose BMC KCS IPMI devices to userspace in a way that enables userspace
> > to talk to host firmware using protocols that are not IPMI.
> >
> > v1 can be found here:
> >
> > https://lore.kernel.org/openbmc/[email protected]/
> >
> > Changes in v2 include:
> >
> > * A rebase onto v5.12-rc2
> > * Incorporation of off-list feedback on SerIRQ configuration from
> > Chiawei
> > * Further validation on hardware for ASPEED KCS devices 2, 3 and 4
> > * Lifting the existing single-open constraint of the IPMI chardev
> > * Fixes addressing Rob's feedback on the conversion of the ASPEED KCS
> > binding to dt-schema
> > * Fixes addressing Rob's feedback on the new aspeed,lpc-interrupts
> > property definition for the ASPEED KCS binding
> >
> > A new chardev device is added whose implementation exposes the Input
> > Data Register (IDR), Output Data Register (ODR) and Status Register
> > (STR) via read() and write(), and implements poll() for event
> > monitoring.
> >
> > The existing /dev/ipmi-kcs* chardev interface exposes the KCS devices in
> > a way which encoded the IPMI protocol in its behaviour. However, as
> > LPC[0] KCS devices give us bi-directional interrupts between the host
> > and a BMC with both a data and status byte, they are useful for purposes
> > beyond IPMI.
> >
> > As a concrete example, libmctp[1] implements a vendor-defined MCTP[2]
> > binding using a combination of LPC Firmware cycles for bulk data
> > transfer and a KCS device via LPC IO cycles for out-of-band protocol
> > control messages[3]. This gives a throughput improvement over the
> > standard KCS binding[4] while continuing to exploit the ease of setup of
> > the LPC bus for early boot firmware on the host processor.
> >
> > The series takes a bit of a winding path to achieve its aim:
> >
> > 1. It begins with patches 1-5 put together by Chia-Wei, which I've
> > rebased on v5.12-rc2. These fix the ASPEED LPC bindings and other
> > non-KCS LPC-related ASPEED device drivers in a way that enables the
> > SerIRQ patches at the end of the series. With Joel's review I'm hoping
> > these 5 can go through the aspeed tree, and that the rest can go through
> > the IPMI tree.
> >
> > 2. Next, patches 6-13 fairly heavily refactor the KCS support in the
> > IPMI part of the tree, re-architecting things such that it's possible to
> > support multiple chardev implementations sitting on top of the ASPEED
> > and Nuvoton device drivers. However, the KCS code didn't really have
> > great separation of concerns as it stood, so even if we disregard the
> > multiple-chardev support I think the cleanups are worthwhile.
> >
> > 3. Patch 14 adds some interrupt management capabilities to the KCS
> > device drivers in preparation for patch 16, which introduces the new
> > "raw" KCS device interface. I'm not stoked about the device name/path,
> > so if people are looking to bikeshed something then feel free to lay
> > into that.
> >
> > 4. The remaining patches switch the ASPEED KCS devicetree binding to
> > dt-schema, add a new interrupt property to describe the SerIRQ behaviour
> > of the device and finally clean up Serial IRQ support in the ASPEED KCS
> > driver.
> >
> > Rob: The dt-binding patches still come before the relevant driver
> > changes, I tried to keep the two close together in the series, hence the
> > bindings changes not being patches 1 and 2.
> >
> > I've exercised the series under qemu with the rainier-bmc machine plus
> > additional patches for KCS support[5]. I've also substituted this series in
> > place of a hacky out-of-tree driver that we've been using for the
> > libmctp stack and successfully booted the host processor under our
> > internal full-platform simulation tools for a Rainier system.
> >
> > Note that this work touches the Nuvoton driver as well as ASPEED's, but
> > I don't have the capability to test those changes or the IPMI chardev
> > path. Tested-by tags would be much appreciated if you can exercise one
> > or both.
> >
> > Please review!
>
> Unfortunately the cover letter got detached from the rest of the series.
>
> Any chance you can take a look at the patches?
There were some minor concerns that were unanswered, and there really
was no review by others for many of the patches.
I would like this patch set, it makes some good cleanups. But I would
like some more review and testing by others, if possible. I'm fairly
sure it has already been done, it just needs to be documented.
-corey
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/[email protected]/
>
> Cheers,
>
> Andrew
On Thu, 8 Apr 2021, at 21:44, Corey Minyard wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 10:27:46AM +0930, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
> > Hi Corey,
> >
> > On Fri, 19 Mar 2021, at 16:49, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > This series is a bit of a mix of things, but its primary purpose is to
> > > expose BMC KCS IPMI devices to userspace in a way that enables userspace
> > > to talk to host firmware using protocols that are not IPMI.
> > >
> > > v1 can be found here:
> > >
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/openbmc/[email protected]/
> > >
> > > Changes in v2 include:
> > >
> > > * A rebase onto v5.12-rc2
> > > * Incorporation of off-list feedback on SerIRQ configuration from
> > > Chiawei
> > > * Further validation on hardware for ASPEED KCS devices 2, 3 and 4
> > > * Lifting the existing single-open constraint of the IPMI chardev
> > > * Fixes addressing Rob's feedback on the conversion of the ASPEED KCS
> > > binding to dt-schema
> > > * Fixes addressing Rob's feedback on the new aspeed,lpc-interrupts
> > > property definition for the ASPEED KCS binding
> > >
> > > A new chardev device is added whose implementation exposes the Input
> > > Data Register (IDR), Output Data Register (ODR) and Status Register
> > > (STR) via read() and write(), and implements poll() for event
> > > monitoring.
> > >
> > > The existing /dev/ipmi-kcs* chardev interface exposes the KCS devices in
> > > a way which encoded the IPMI protocol in its behaviour. However, as
> > > LPC[0] KCS devices give us bi-directional interrupts between the host
> > > and a BMC with both a data and status byte, they are useful for purposes
> > > beyond IPMI.
> > >
> > > As a concrete example, libmctp[1] implements a vendor-defined MCTP[2]
> > > binding using a combination of LPC Firmware cycles for bulk data
> > > transfer and a KCS device via LPC IO cycles for out-of-band protocol
> > > control messages[3]. This gives a throughput improvement over the
> > > standard KCS binding[4] while continuing to exploit the ease of setup of
> > > the LPC bus for early boot firmware on the host processor.
> > >
> > > The series takes a bit of a winding path to achieve its aim:
> > >
> > > 1. It begins with patches 1-5 put together by Chia-Wei, which I've
> > > rebased on v5.12-rc2. These fix the ASPEED LPC bindings and other
> > > non-KCS LPC-related ASPEED device drivers in a way that enables the
> > > SerIRQ patches at the end of the series. With Joel's review I'm hoping
> > > these 5 can go through the aspeed tree, and that the rest can go through
> > > the IPMI tree.
> > >
> > > 2. Next, patches 6-13 fairly heavily refactor the KCS support in the
> > > IPMI part of the tree, re-architecting things such that it's possible to
> > > support multiple chardev implementations sitting on top of the ASPEED
> > > and Nuvoton device drivers. However, the KCS code didn't really have
> > > great separation of concerns as it stood, so even if we disregard the
> > > multiple-chardev support I think the cleanups are worthwhile.
> > >
> > > 3. Patch 14 adds some interrupt management capabilities to the KCS
> > > device drivers in preparation for patch 16, which introduces the new
> > > "raw" KCS device interface. I'm not stoked about the device name/path,
> > > so if people are looking to bikeshed something then feel free to lay
> > > into that.
> > >
> > > 4. The remaining patches switch the ASPEED KCS devicetree binding to
> > > dt-schema, add a new interrupt property to describe the SerIRQ behaviour
> > > of the device and finally clean up Serial IRQ support in the ASPEED KCS
> > > driver.
> > >
> > > Rob: The dt-binding patches still come before the relevant driver
> > > changes, I tried to keep the two close together in the series, hence the
> > > bindings changes not being patches 1 and 2.
> > >
> > > I've exercised the series under qemu with the rainier-bmc machine plus
> > > additional patches for KCS support[5]. I've also substituted this series in
> > > place of a hacky out-of-tree driver that we've been using for the
> > > libmctp stack and successfully booted the host processor under our
> > > internal full-platform simulation tools for a Rainier system.
> > >
> > > Note that this work touches the Nuvoton driver as well as ASPEED's, but
> > > I don't have the capability to test those changes or the IPMI chardev
> > > path. Tested-by tags would be much appreciated if you can exercise one
> > > or both.
> > >
> > > Please review!
> >
> > Unfortunately the cover letter got detached from the rest of the series.
> >
> > Any chance you can take a look at the patches?
>
> There were some minor concerns that were unanswered, and there really
> was no review by others for many of the patches.
Right; I was planning to clean up the minor concerns once I'd received
some more feedback. I could have done a better job of communicating
that :)
>
> I would like this patch set, it makes some good cleanups. But I would
> like some more review and testing by others, if possible.
No worries. I'm trying to rope some others in to take a look.
Thanks for the response.
Andrew
On Thu, 8 Apr 2021 at 23:47, Andrew Jeffery <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Apr 2021, at 21:44, Corey Minyard wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 10:27:46AM +0930, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
> > > > 1. It begins with patches 1-5 put together by Chia-Wei, which I've
> > > > rebased on v5.12-rc2. These fix the ASPEED LPC bindings and other
> > > > non-KCS LPC-related ASPEED device drivers in a way that enables the
> > > > SerIRQ patches at the end of the series. With Joel's review I'm hoping
> > > > these 5 can go through the aspeed tree, and that the rest can go through
> > > > the IPMI tree.
> > > >
> > > > Please review!
> > >
> > > Unfortunately the cover letter got detached from the rest of the series.
> > >
> > > Any chance you can take a look at the patches?
> >
> > There were some minor concerns that were unanswered, and there really
> > was no review by others for many of the patches.
>
> Right; I was planning to clean up the minor concerns once I'd received
> some more feedback. I could have done a better job of communicating
> that :)
I'll merge the first five through the aspeed tree this coming merge
window. We have acks from the relevant maintainers.
Arnd: would you prefer that this come as it's own pull request, or as
part of the device tree branch?
Andrew, Corey: once I've got my pull requests out I'll look at
reviewing the rest of the series. Perhaps it would pay to re-send that
hunk of patches Andrew with the nits fixed?
Cheers,
Joel
On Fri, 9 Apr 2021, at 13:37, Joel Stanley wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Apr 2021 at 23:47, Andrew Jeffery <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Thu, 8 Apr 2021, at 21:44, Corey Minyard wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 10:27:46AM +0930, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
>
> > > > > 1. It begins with patches 1-5 put together by Chia-Wei, which I've
> > > > > rebased on v5.12-rc2. These fix the ASPEED LPC bindings and other
> > > > > non-KCS LPC-related ASPEED device drivers in a way that enables the
> > > > > SerIRQ patches at the end of the series. With Joel's review I'm hoping
> > > > > these 5 can go through the aspeed tree, and that the rest can go through
> > > > > the IPMI tree.
>
> > > > >
> > > > > Please review!
> > > >
> > > > Unfortunately the cover letter got detached from the rest of the series.
> > > >
> > > > Any chance you can take a look at the patches?
> > >
> > > There were some minor concerns that were unanswered, and there really
> > > was no review by others for many of the patches.
> >
> > Right; I was planning to clean up the minor concerns once I'd received
> > some more feedback. I could have done a better job of communicating
> > that :)
>
> I'll merge the first five through the aspeed tree this coming merge
> window. We have acks from the relevant maintainers.
>
> Arnd: would you prefer that this come as it's own pull request, or as
> part of the device tree branch?
>
> Andrew, Corey: once I've got my pull requests out I'll look at
> reviewing the rest of the series. Perhaps it would pay to re-send that
> hunk of patches Andrew with the nits fixed?
Yep; Zev has done some reviews for me so I'll address those, rebase on
your tree once you've sent out the pull-req and send out a v3.
Corey: Are you okay with that for now?
Cheers,
Andrew
On Fri, Apr 9, 2021 at 6:09 AM Joel Stanley <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Apr 2021 at 23:47, Andrew Jeffery <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Thu, 8 Apr 2021, at 21:44, Corey Minyard wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 10:27:46AM +0930, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
> > > There were some minor concerns that were unanswered, and there really
> > > was no review by others for many of the patches.
> >
> > Right; I was planning to clean up the minor concerns once I'd received
> > some more feedback. I could have done a better job of communicating
> > that :)
>
> I'll merge the first five through the aspeed tree this coming merge
> window. We have acks from the relevant maintainers.
>
> Arnd: would you prefer that this come as it's own pull request, or as
> part of the device tree branch?
When you are unsure, it's almost never wrong to go for a separate
branch, which gives you a chance to have a concise description
of the contents in the tag. This would be particularly helpful if there
are incompatible changes to the DT binding that require a justification.
If you are only adding a few DT nodes to existing files, then merging
these through the regular branch is probably easier.
Arnd