problem: Re: [PATCH] input: fixup X86_MRST selects
in [Kernel]
|
Prev: Ext4: Make file creation time, i_version and i_generation available by xattrs
Next: PM: Make it possible to avoid wakeup events from being lost
From: Pan, Jacob jun on 28 Jun 2010 19:30 There is no DMI support yet in MRST FW. We have a new x86 HW subarch ID in boot_param, then we use it to select x86_init abstractions. Both boot_param and x86_init are x86 arch specific so I guess we can use them in 8042 driver under CONFIG_X86. Not sure if it is possible to move x86 i8042_platform_init under x86_init (the x86 part). >-----Original Message----- >From: Dmitry Torokhov [mailto:dmitry.torokhov(a)gmail.com] >Sent: Monday, June 28, 2010 3:45 PM >To: Pan, Jacob jun >Cc: Randy Dunlap; Stephen Rothwell; linux-next(a)vger.kernel.org; LKML; >linux-input(a)vger.kernel.org; akpm; chuck.lever(a)oracle.com; H. Peter >Anvin >Subject: Re: problem: Re: [PATCH] input: fixup X86_MRST selects > >On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 02:12:03PM -0700, Pan, Jacob jun wrote: >> > >> We do intend to maintain binary compatibility between generic kernel >and Moorestown. >> I guess the challenge is not having enumeration of i8042 pass to the >driver. Do you >> prefer abort i8042_platform_init() based on #define CONFIG_X86_MRST? >It is no safe >> to probe HW on Moorestown, unfortunately. > >Any check based on CONFIG_X86_MRST means that kernel is not generic. >We'd need a runtime check (but not necessarily one that bangs ports). Is >there something in processor flags, or DMI, or similar that woudl allow >i8042 to see that it runs on Moorestown? > >-- >Dmitry -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: H. Peter Anvin on 2 Jul 2010 02:30
On 07/01/2010 09:46 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 04:22:03PM -0700, Pan, Jacob jun wrote: >> There is no DMI support yet in MRST FW. We have a new x86 HW subarch >> ID in boot_param, then we use it to select x86_init abstractions. Both >> boot_param and x86_init are x86 arch specific so I guess we can use >> them in 8042 driver under CONFIG_X86. Not sure if it is possible to >> move x86 i8042_platform_init under x86_init (the x86 part). >> > > Moving i8042_platform_init() into platform code is quite invasive, > how about we to the following? > > Thanks. > Uck, no! ---- Moorestown does not have legacy hardware (i8042, i8259) and does not like legacy ports being poked by drivers. Instead of playing with Kconfig selections let's check if we set up dummy (null) legacy PIC during startup and abort i8042 initialization as well. This should fix the following bug: ---- The presence of 8042 and 8259 are orthogonal. In fact, there are quite a few systems on the market which have 8259 but not 8042, and at least having the ability to handle that correctly instead of just assuming that those I/O ports are safe is pretty key. So please don't commingle these completely unrelated platform attributes. -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ |