Nico Huber has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/44465 )
Change subject: mb/supermicro/x11-lga1151: undo set DRIVER for GPO ......................................................................
Patch Set 1:
(1 comment)
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/44465/1//COMMIT_MSG Commit Message:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/44465/1//COMMIT_MSG@10 PS1, Line 10: external devices through GPI. But there is no point in configuring : this for GPO.
@Nico, what do you think of this?
If I had such a board, I would start from scratch.
I think the history of the file is a mess. That's what we get when we allow to merge board ports that use internal macros that they shouldn't. No idea how to assess if the driver ownership is wanted for any pad (the original pad had bit 4 of the second word always set. does that make any sense?).
Using tools to translate that without reasoning about every single pad to other macros makes it worse. Now it looks like the driver ownership is intentional in specific cases. But it probably never was?
Marking this as resolved as my original concern is gone. Looking at the code it seems beyond reason. We shouldn't ask if it's reasonable to tag driver ownership. We should ask what was intended, first.