lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Feb]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 6/6] i2c: designware: Use PCI PSP driver for communication
From
On 2/16/2023 15:16, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 03:01:35PM -0600, Limonciello, Mario wrote:
>> On 2/16/2023 14:59, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 02:55:07PM -0600, Limonciello, Mario wrote:
>>>> On 2/16/2023 08:56, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 07:29:53AM -0600, Mario Limonciello wrote:
>>>>>> On 2/16/23 07:27, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2/10/23 00:38, Mario Limonciello wrote:
>
> ...
>
>>>>>>>>     config I2C_DESIGNWARE_AMDPSP
>>>>>>>>       bool "AMD PSP I2C semaphore support"
>>>>>>>> -    depends on X86_MSR
>>>>>>>>       depends on ACPI
>>>>>>>>       depends on I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM
>>>>>>>> +    depends on CRYPTO_DEV_SP_PSP && !(I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM=y &&
>>>>>>>> CRYPTO_DEV_CCP_DD=m)
>>>>>>>>       help
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Would this look better if split? I.e.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     depends on CRYPTO_DEV_SP_PSP
>>>>>>>     depends on !(I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM=y && CRYPTO_DEV_CCP_DD=m)
>>>>>> Yes, thanks I'll change that for next version.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm wondering if this is homegrown implementation of 'imply' keyword?
>>>>
>>>> Like this?
>>>>
>>>> config I2C_DESIGNWARE_AMDPSP
>>>> depends on CRYPTO_DEV_SP_PSP
>>>> depends on CRYPTO_DEV_CCP_DD
>>>>
>>>> config CRYPTO_DEV_CCP_DD
>>>> imply I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM
>>>
>>> Looks okay, but I'm not familiar with this code. The documentation about
>>> 'imply' can be found here:
>>>
>>> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/kbuild/kconfig-language.html#menu-attributes
>>
>> Yeah I found that, but this was my first time using imply, so I was hoping
>> someone who has used it could validate I interpreted it correctly.
>>
>> Following the example CRYPTO_DEV_CCP_DD would be FOO and
>> I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM would be BAZ so I thought so.
>
> 'imply' == weak 'select', it means that the target option may or may not be
> selected. I.o.w. "optional" dependency.
>
> Does CRYPTO_DEV_CCP_DD use I2C DesignWare code?
>
> If I understand correctly the "depends on !(I2C_DESIGNWARE_PLATFORM=y &&
> CRYPTO_DEV_CCP_DD=m)" you want to have IS_REACHABLE() in your code and actually
> "imply CRYPTO_DEV_CCP_DD" in the I2C_DESIGNWARE_AMDPSP.
>
>

Allowing that combination and using IS_REACHABLE means that it's going
to actually load earlier that expected, so I suppose it needs to be
something like this then in the probe code for i2c-designware-amdpsp.c:

if (!IS_REACHABLE()
return -EPROBE_DEFER;

Right?

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-03-27 00:26    [W:0.087 / U:0.184 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site