> On Jun 3, 2018, at 7:30 AM, Thor Lancelot Simon <t...@panix.com> wrote:
> 
> On Sat, Jun 02, 2018 at 03:51:07PM -0700, Jason Thorpe wrote:
>> 
>>> On Jun 2, 2018, at 2:07 PM, Paul Goyette <p...@whooppee.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> There's the "minimal-functionality" controller that sits on the "system 
>>> management PCI bus" and driven by the imc/imcsmb driver.
>> 
>> 
>> OMG, what a dumpster fire.  Geez, if they were going to to for minimal 
>> functionality, why even bother with dumb logic like that??  A pair of GPIO 
>> pins would have been better!
> 
> I have a dumb suggestion.
> 
> Would we avoid, in the end, pain and suffering if we didn't treat this
> controller (or controllers like it) as i2c controllers, and just provided
> alternate attachements for the leaf drivers?
> 
> Then we'd be free to use more sophisticated methods with "real" i2c
> controllers, and only do potentially invasive things when we found a
> nasty pseudo-i2c one.

Actually, I am thinking more of a set of properties that control the behavior 
of the generic i2c code:

— i2c-indirect-probe-strategy — We’ll let the i2c code default to 
“smbus_quick_write”, and this property can override with “smbus_receive_byte” 
or “none”.  If “none”, then we skip the probe entirely as we do now, but of 
course run the risk of device ghosting.

— i2c-indirect-device-whitelist — For a case like the Intel CPU imc, it can 
provide an array of device names that it can safely handle.  This seems 
reasonable considering it’s a specialized controller anyway that’s designed 
specifically to talk to memory SPD EEPROMs.  Think of this as almost a hybrid 
of direct and indirect … “this is what will be here, but we don’t know if it 
actually is”.  In this scenario, a driver like spdmem would have to do do the 
heavy lifting to do the actual presence-detect (which it already does, in fact).

Boy, I really would like a way to get access to the new device_t between 
config_found and when it calls ca_attach for the device… right now, 
device_register is the only hook we have for attaching properties to a new 
device.

-- thorpej

Reply via email to