Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <Yj19RH3qpzQsIV/O@shikoro>
In-Reply-To: <Yj19RH3qpzQsIV/O@shikoro>
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date:   Sat, 26 Mar 2022 12:58:36 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wgoeUc15-8Wu8U=4FnwhgmyU3C13R107oigbmJRpi_sZA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PULL REQUEST] i2c for v5.18
To:     Wolfram Sang <wsa@kernel.org>, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Peter Rosin <peda@axentia.se>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>,
        Terry Bowman <terry.bowman@amd.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 1:28 AM Wolfram Sang <wsa@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> I2C has for 5.18: tracepoints when Linux acts as an I2C client, added
> support for AMD PSP, whole subsytsem now uses generic_handle_irq_safe(),
> piix4 driver gained MMIO access enabling so far missed controllers with
> AMD chipsets, plus a bulk of device driver updates, refactorization, and
> fixes.

It feels odd/wrong to use the piix4 driver for the AMD MMIO case on SB800.

Would it not have made more sense to just make that a separate driver?

It feels like now the piix4 driver has a lot of "if SB800" for the
probing code, and then a lot of "if (mmio)" at runtime.

I've pulled this, but just wanted to mention this "that looks a bit
odd". How much code is actually _shared_ in the SB800 case?

I'm not insisting on splitting this up - maybe it all makes sense. I'm
just questioning it.

             Linus