From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=1wl0=JR=lists.ozlabs.org=openbmc-bounces+openbmc=archiver.kernel.org@kernel.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on
	aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID,
	DKIM_SIGNED,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0
Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99])
	by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A9CDC433ED
	for <openbmc@archiver.kernel.org>; Tue, 20 Apr 2021 17:16:38 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7490961076
	for <openbmc@archiver.kernel.org>; Tue, 20 Apr 2021 17:16:37 +0000 (UTC)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 7490961076
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=openbmc-bounces+openbmc=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org
Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1])
	by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FPr2C5Zynz303J
	for <openbmc@archiver.kernel.org>; Wed, 21 Apr 2021 03:16:35 +1000 (AEST)
Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org;
	dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20201202 header.b=rSEe+Z3T;
	dkim-atps=neutral
Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized)
 smtp.mailfrom=kernel.org (client-ip=198.145.29.99; helo=mail.kernel.org;
 envelope-from=broonie@kernel.org; receiver=<UNKNOWN>)
Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key;
 unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256
 header.s=k20201202 header.b=rSEe+Z3T; 
 dkim-atps=neutral
Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4FPr1l0Tl1z2yR8
 for <openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org>; Wed, 21 Apr 2021 03:16:10 +1000 (AEST)
Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E3EEF613B2;
 Tue, 20 Apr 2021 17:16:06 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org;
 s=k20201202; t=1618938967;
 bh=H+j6/O+vzwBdqDqne8S74Rsssnj/Bb/OXT6d4SHJfxs=;
 h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From;
 b=rSEe+Z3Tqfsd5sKd7I8a4Y0cw2sNwm+1DuV05zXPlZqQwIayT0RYAL8G388R4CRUO
 6oBuEts/VwUcNy8nxgEWOCCGm+pwZdm/x1xF/B4r9t9JUGCZdmnSoL/0ibyNlOeuz9
 qo+ZzzUr8MPc+rBFP4A7itVhb0T2FLGZCKto+mYyqHIABamanvkjr+UoS1h0ik6NWQ
 ESZHhsehKyDIbTzrBKvRyvF8Fx9BNAHiffHvtb4fallSj1u+bHUCwD3o+skPpNijfa
 GZBjk8Ge75n3jLcYd6rIzO2jtGnbo5+nt4BnSZi9EgvG+6NQ5nidHgXZboGQU3vfDs
 uuf/k8BRVtZlg==
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2021 18:15:40 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Zev Weiss <zev@bewilderbeest.net>
Subject: Re: Enabling pmbus power control
Message-ID: <20210420171540.GG6073@sirena.org.uk>
References: <20210330193810.GA235990@roeck-us.net>
 <YH4ukR5egB2eG0Vo@hatter.bewilderbeest.net>
 <20210420033648.GA227111@roeck-us.net>
 <YH5rky8nA4nKAVdg@hatter.bewilderbeest.net>
 <9639fa33-01ca-9802-e745-5e3edb81e305@roeck-us.net>
 <YH59WOg0iKbz1d0l@hatter.bewilderbeest.net>
 <fe111c8a-9588-dbfb-624a-29bb3a5efe13@roeck-us.net>
 <YH7w6HUtBSCZRWq4@hatter.bewilderbeest.net>
 <20210420161317.GE6073@sirena.org.uk>
 <YH8D+LWxWPqnFd2h@hatter.bewilderbeest.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
 protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="OFj+1YLvsEfSXdCH"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YH8D+LWxWPqnFd2h@hatter.bewilderbeest.net>
X-Cookie: Falling rock.
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
X-BeenThere: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Development list for OpenBMC <openbmc.lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/openbmc>,
 <mailto:openbmc-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/openbmc/>
List-Post: <mailto:openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:openbmc-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/openbmc>,
 <mailto:openbmc-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org, Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.com>,
 Andrew Jeffery <andrew@aj.id.au>, openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org,
 Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
 Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Errors-To: openbmc-bounces+openbmc=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org
Sender: "openbmc"
 <openbmc-bounces+openbmc=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org>


--OFj+1YLvsEfSXdCH
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 11:40:24AM -0500, Zev Weiss wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 11:13:18AM CDT, Mark Brown wrote:

> > I already suggested writing a driver or drivers that represent the
> > hardware you have, that advice remains.  It's hard to follow what you
> > were trying to say with your long mail earlier today but it seems like

> That email was an attempt to explain why writing a driver for the specific
> hardware devices we're powering seems like a poor fit to me.  To summarize:

>  - There's a wide variety of different devices potentially behind an
> LM25066.

This is true for lots of hardware, we still integrate things into
frameworks.

>  - A hypothetical driver for any one of them would be completely
> non-specific to that device and functionally identical to a driver    for
> any other, because the only hardware it would actually be    touching is the
> LM25066, and in ways that are again completely    non-specific to anything
> but the LM25066 itself.

I don't see why that would be the case at all.  Even within the indended
application as a power controller for a hotpluggable bus there's plenty
of potential for integration into a wider representation of the socket
things get inserted into - for example I've worked with buses that had
support for operator signalling of hotplug (buttons to press to initiate
hot removal, with lights to signal when a clean shutdown of the card had
been completed), you might also want to have additional environment
monitoring and of course the labelling that I mentioned in an earlier
post.  I can imagine you probably have some other connection of some
kind to the host too (eg, network ports) to join up and perhaps sync
hotplug for.

> I'm not at all opposed to using a abstractions or frameworks (I'd very much
> like to do so in fact).  The problem is that I've thus far been unable to
> determine exactly what the appropriate one is.

Perhaps you need to write some kind of generic system for hotplugging
modules if you can't find one.

--OFj+1YLvsEfSXdCH
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAABCgAdFiEEreZoqmdXGLWf4p/qJNaLcl1Uh9AFAmB/DDwACgkQJNaLcl1U
h9DSeAf/ZEL/+2Z4UbqEH68jcytAmNORaqjie1w4JK/FywH4S1K3/sdrOyEY3Xyi
geHnrQsV1pTKl0BErVGLGOz6goAC17RkUaE+8eiy88vOFXmLgTdXH2hyacfB6Jop
SMeaj8TOb/ZvTkKzAkq6WuPlfg2NnYQkA4UlKKHRT8azfIXX3DE3oTmOTksumqRp
AwzSppNS/Ke1EVhr68wsEw1Xw9eO3KXsbP80aCb7x3OnMiDeAodW14fEy3vG2p3G
4h7rdJjKpwZGiBq3bM7M6l4t8FkhLlFpitgFVR6Jja7Tutt5lpgQE34PY3cp7S6N
bvvJ1Kp4xkafHcenyTro6j2/VW37mQ==
=+YvT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--OFj+1YLvsEfSXdCH--