From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from psionic.psi5.com (psionic.psi5.com [185.187.169.70]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3664D1E5B63 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2026 04:52:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.187.169.70 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769662370; cv=none; b=WEnj+f4JDHBVMDZjQXWd/0KJ9xOhuC2nmkGeY3mgPxVRNMZppEMeIRKLR70pNfTNwYSAiDGQaf28P7dDkj4LzUWsLypGaFzkFQP3n257muRM6u3Zb+O02zTmNsbF0frrpm6bUPFB7IthKF2dnXAUGsgjj71UTNUF3Nve8sjoxmk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769662370; c=relaxed/simple; bh=KC++MDX1JimlhKoINXFtV4T/5EQnSP0bWh96Fy9/Ga8=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=bDVak/dVgi4xXatDPS1iqAmqLZna51ZPkmaxSLxRHRC1o0D7q4LvNC2eVr4ZSKe230Thl+wMU7Aa78yvxxDznheiE/I0pcaqbQSerTKIoJCNjZnp9QelivDpUWyNTVpeoGG5APIaXKmGk6MEU89Uew7z/DkENtgPisu8cgSNkO4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=hogyros.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=hogyros.de; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.187.169.70 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=hogyros.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=hogyros.de Received: from [192.168.10.94] (unknown [39.110.247.193]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by psionic.psi5.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AF9D23F104; Thu, 29 Jan 2026 05:45:49 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2026 13:45:44 +0900 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] misc/mei: INTEL_MEI should depend on X86 or DRM_XE To: "Usyskin, Alexander" , Arnd Bergmann , Geert Uytterhoeven , Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" References: <8e2646fb71b148b3d38beb13f19b14e3634a1e1a.1769541024.git.geert+renesas@glider.be> <2dd8286a-a3c7-4a3d-bd5d-011966dc07f9@app.fastmail.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Simon Richter In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, On 1/28/26 3:57 PM, Usyskin, Alexander wrote: > There are different usages of mei: > - for discrete graphics xe/i915 will load mei via auxiliary device also on non x86. > - for integrated xe/i915 communicate with mei for on-chip CSME - this scenario is x86 only. > IMO this should cover all: > depends on X86 || DRM_XE!=n || DRM_I915!=n || COMPILE_TEST Is there discrete i915? DRM_I915 depends on PCI && X86 (so "X86 || DRM_I915" is redundant, which is why I didn't add it in my version of the patch. If DRM_I915 is useful on non-x86 we might want to change that as well. Also, is there any policy on dependency ordering? On non-X86, INTEL_MEI becomes available only after selecting DRM_XE, which is in a directory included much later, so the question is not shown initially, is that a problem? Simon