On Thu, 17 Jul 2025 at 04:32, Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 3/13/25 13:58, Antheas Kapenekakis wrote: > > On Thu, 13 Mar 2025 at 21:10, Cryolitia PukNgae via B4 Relay > > <devnull+Cryolitia.gmail.com@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> From: Cryolitia PukNgae <Cryolitia@xxxxxxxxx> > >> > >> Sensors driver for GPD Handhelds that expose fan reading and control via > >> hwmon sysfs. > >> > >> Shenzhen GPD Technology Co., Ltd. manufactures a series of handheld > >> devices. This driver implements these functions through x86 port-mapped IO. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Cryolitia PukNgae <Cryolitia@xxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> MAINTAINERS | 6 + > >> drivers/hwmon/Kconfig | 10 + > >> drivers/hwmon/Makefile | 1 + > >> drivers/hwmon/gpd-fan.c | 681 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> 4 files changed, 698 insertions(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > >> index 0fa7c5728f1e64d031f4a47b6fce1db484ce0fc2..777ba74ccb07ccc0840c3cd34e7b4d98d726f964 100644 > >> --- a/MAINTAINERS > >> +++ b/MAINTAINERS > >> @@ -9762,6 +9762,12 @@ F: drivers/phy/samsung/phy-gs101-ufs.c > >> F: include/dt-bindings/clock/google,gs101.h > >> K: [gG]oogle.?[tT]ensor > >> > >> +GPD FAN DRIVER > >> +M: Cryolitia PukNgae <Cryolitia@xxxxxxxxx> > >> +L: linux-hwmon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> +S: Maintained > >> +F: drivers/hwmon/gpd-fan.c > > > > A problem we had with oxp sensors is that once OneXPlayer expanded > > their EC to include e.g., battery capacity limits, it was no longer > > appropriate for it to reside in hwmon. I expect GPD to do the same > > sometime in the near future. If that is the case, should we > > futureproof the driver by moving it to platform-x86 right away? > > > > My problem with platform drivers, especially with x86 platform drivers, > including the OneXPlayer driver, is that the developers responsible for > those drivers refrain from implementing the client drivers as auxiliary > drivers but instead like to bundle everything into a non-subsystem > directory. I have always wondered why that is the case. My best guess > is that it is to limit and/or avoid subsystem maintainer oversight. > Does that work out for you ? Particularly for simple ECs such as OneXPlayer and GPD boards I think keeping all the addresses in the same file makes sense. E.g., I just sent a Fixes for the OneXPlayer G1 AMD variant and it was one commit instead of 2 or 3. At least for me it was practical, I did not consider having a lesser oversight as a benefit when making that choice. But I do understand the concern. Antheas > Not objecting, I am just curious. > > Guenter > >
