Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20180808172414.29983-1-swboyd@chromium.org> <20180808172414.29983-3-swboyd@chromium.org>
In-Reply-To: <20180808172414.29983-3-swboyd@chromium.org>
From:   Julius Werner <jwerner@chromium.org>
Date:   Wed, 8 Aug 2018 12:07:30 -0700
Message-ID: <CAODwPW_sP2=w-qRmVTAm+HCgomxj7C1Z_tLtLzUy-eSp8QrZeA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] firmware: coreboot: Collapse platform drivers into
 bus core
To:     swboyd@chromium.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Wei-Ning Huang <wnhuang@chromium.org>,
        Julius Werner <jwerner@chromium.org>,
        Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>, samuel@sholland.org,
        Sudeep.Holla@arm.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

> +config GOOGLE_COREBOOT_TABLE_ACPI
> +       tristate
> +       default GOOGLE_COREBOOT_TABLE

I don't think this helps in upgrading (as your commit message says)
unless you also keep the 'select GOOGLE_COREBOOT_TABLE' here, right?

> -int coreboot_table_init(struct device *dev, void __iomem *ptr)
> +static int coreboot_table_init(struct device *dev, void __iomem *ptr)

nit: There's little reason to keep coreboot_table_init() a separate
function now. Could maybe compact the code a little more if you merge
it into probe()? (Also could then do the signature sanity check before
trusting the length values to map the whole thing, which is probably a
good idea.)

>         if (ptr_header) {
>                 bus_unregister(&coreboot_bus_type);
>                 iounmap(ptr_header);

Could ptr_header be handled by devm now, somehow? Also, don't you have
two bus_unregister() now (here and in coreboot_exit())? Or is that
intentional?

> +static struct platform_driver coreboot_table_driver = {
> +       .probe = coreboot_table_probe,
> +       .remove = coreboot_table_remove,
> +       .driver = {
> +               .name = "coreboot_table",
> +               .acpi_match_table = ACPI_PTR(cros_coreboot_acpi_match),
> +               .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(coreboot_of_match),

Who takes precedence if they both exist? Will we have two
coreboot_table busses? (That would probably not be so good...)