[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100217143743.GB3011@sortiz.org>
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2010 15:37:44 +0100
From: Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>
To: Mike Rapoport <mike@...pulab.co.il>
Cc: Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>,
Denis Turischev <denis@...pulab.co.il>,
David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] MFD: introduce lpc_sch for Intel SCH LPC bridge
Hi Mike,
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 02:35:30PM +0200, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> Samuel,
>
> Jean Delvare wrote:
> > On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 12:03:17 +0200, Denis Turischev wrote:
> >> Jean Delvare wrote:
> >>> Might be a good idea to use acpi_check_resource_conflict() or similar
> >>> before instantiating the platform devices.
> >> May be it worth to add such resource check directly to mfd_add_device function?
> >
> > I'm not sure. I suspect that many MFD devices are never used on
> > ACPI-aware systems, so it might be considered overkill. OTOH the calls
> > resolve to empty stubs when ACPI is disabled so... I have no objection,
> > but I'll leave the decision to somebody else ;)
> >
>
> What do you think? Shall we add something like mfd_verify_resources that will call
> acpi_check_region or something similar?
Yes, that sounds like a reasonable idea. We should probably call
acpi_check_resource_conflict() straight from mfd_add_device(). I'll do that,
no need for Denis to add that patch for its code to be merged.
Cheers,
Samuel.
>
> --
> Sincerely yours,
> Mike.
--
Intel Open Source Technology Centre
http://oss.intel.com/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists