On Thu, 31 Oct 2024 10:00:40 +0000, Jens Glathe <jens.glathe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 31.10.24 10:46, Abel Vesa wrote: > > On 24-10-30 17:02:32, Marc Zyngier wrote: > >> On Fri, 25 Oct 2024 13:32:24 +0100, > >> Sibi Sankar <quic_sibis@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> Add initial support for X1E001DE Snapdragon Devkit for Windows. X1E001DE > >>> is the speed binned variant of X1E80100 that supports turbo boost up to > >>> 4.3 Ghz. The initial support includes the following: > >>> > >>> -DSPs > >>> -Ethernet (RTL8125BG) over the pcie 5 instance. > >>> -NVme > >>> -Wifi > >>> -USB-C ports > >>> > >>> V3: > >>> * Asked around and looked at the firmware, couldn't find a codename so > >>> will keep it as DEVKIT. Will update it if someone from the community > >>> finds something else. > >> My machine has the following information as part of its DMI tables: > >> > >> Handle 0x0005, DMI type 1, 27 bytes > >> System Information > >> Manufacturer: Qualcomm > >> Product Name: Snapdragon-Devkit > >> Version: 2.1 > >> Serial Number: 5 > >> UUID: 63b5fc8b-9c50-89aa-fd0f-3fcef93dc291 > >> Wake-up Type: Power Switch > >> SKU Number: 6 > >> Family: SCP_HAMOA > >> > >> So I guess that Snapdragon-Devkit is another possible name. But given > >> that it is a bit of a mouthful, devkit, Devkit, or any other variation > >> on the case would work for me. > > The point was to have something unique A codename would be unique. > > Naming it Snapdragon-Devkit (or just devkit) will be confusing since > > there was already a 2023 devkit (from Microsoft) with the Snapdragon > > 8cx Gen 3, and probably the next compute platform will also have a devkit > > as well. So probably "X Elite devkit" could be the right option.. Odd, I didn't get that email. My point was the the HW already comes with a full description as part of the existing tables. If you really want something that is truly unique to that platform and that can be used by a tool (be it firmware, kernel or userspace) to understand what it is running on, then you cannot have *less* information. At the very least, you would need Manufacturer, Product Name, Version and Family. But does it really matter? I don't think it is *that* crucial. At the end of the day, this is only used to pick the correct DT out of a set for a given SoC, or worse case a family of SoCs that are closely related. > As for The Windows Dev Kit 2023, dmidecode says this: > > Handle 0x0009, DMI type 1, 27 bytes > System Information > Manufacturer: Microsoft Corporation > Product Name: Windows Dev Kit 2023 > Version: 124I:00097T:000M:0200000B:07 > Serial Number: 0F01C4F22373F6 > UUID: e4a4662c-8367-75d0-a54f-1d04bd404860 > Wake-up Type: Unknown > SKU Number: 2043 > Family: Surface > > That's also really a mouthful. In my patchset for it there were some > name / path changes, microsoft/blackrock it is now. Would be cool to > have short and unique names. In the end, whatever works and is unique. > Like those UUIDs? Are those actually per platform? or per unit? On my box, the serial number is probably a dud. What does the UUID reports on your X1E box? Thanks, M. -- Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
