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: <20221221185540.2265771-1-robbarnes@google.com>
 <CACeCKafZu=46NE--r9W-wtJWAhj8=s46yCBO4N4u5nt4COqYAQ@mail.gmail.com> <CA+Dqm30XF=wDVcdUabbHySp-fwf+zFNqXpdYDW3bDTOwRbkiZw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+Dqm30XF=wDVcdUabbHySp-fwf+zFNqXpdYDW3bDTOwRbkiZw@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Prashant Malani <pmalani@chromium.org>
Date:   Wed, 21 Dec 2022 16:38:28 -0800
Message-ID: <CACeCKafGg5=1MQQdCtXDm-3LE2VsixHPsUDngRwQXUvAwQ=u=Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/cros_ec: Handle CrOS EC panics
To:     Rob Barnes <robbarnes@google.com>
Cc:     Guenter Roeck <groeck@chromium.org>,
        chrome-platform@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        dtor@chromium.org, Benson Leung <bleung@chromium.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 3:55 PM Rob Barnes <robbarnes@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 12:23 PM Prashant Malani <pmalani@chromium.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Can you provide a link (either in the commit, or here in the comment)
> > to the coreboot/BIOS code which uses this value? I feel this should
> > be documented in some form that correlates the caller and the callee.
>
> Link: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromiumos/third_party/coreboot/+/4023535

Thanks. Please add a code link (for example, I could find [2], but you
could use another code mirror
if there is a canonical one for coreboot) to the commit description,
or in the comment when you send
out v2.

> > Any reason we cannot use the existing event_notifier (with value argument)?
> > It's a system panic, so I doubt that computational overhead for other
> > notifier block
> > listeners is a concern.
>
> The value field is already being used for "queued_during_suspend" in
> event_notifier.

OK, I suppose you could use the data pointer...

It's just I find having a notifier for a single use case overkill(even
2 would be fine); one could get away with exposing a method
in cros_typec_debugfs via a local .h file (it can compile to a stub if
cros_typec_debugfs is not compiled to the kernel);
the LPC code can then just call that method instead of invoking a notifier.

Best regards,

-Prashant

> > [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=bdc48fa11e46f867ea4d75fa59ee87a7f48be144
[2] https://github.com/coreboot/coreboot/blob/ff6b3af113f84a1957dcdf8a8179a751ce08becf/src/ec/google/chromeec/acpi/ec.asl#L15