[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120706055234.GC2237@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 08:52:34 +0300
From: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
To: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>
Cc: Lan Tianyu <tianyu.lan@...el.com>, khali@...ux-fr.org,
ben-linux@...ff.org, w.sang@...gutronix.de, lenb@...nel.org,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jkosina@...e.cz, chatty@...c.fr,
jj_ding@....com.tw
Subject: Re: Fwd: Hid over I2C and ACPI interaction
On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 03:01:57PM +0800, Zhang Rui wrote:
> +Note that although these are ACPI devices, we prefer to use PnP drivers
> for them,
> +this is because:
> +1. all the non-ACPI-predefined Devices are exported as PnP devices as
> well
> +2. PnP bus is a well designed bus. Probing via PnP layer saves a lot of
> work
> + for the device driver, e.g. getting & parsing ACPI resources.
(Nice BKM, thanks for sharing)
I have few questions about using PnP drivers instead of pure ACPI drivers.
ACPI 5.0 defined some new resources, for example "Fixed DMA descriptor"
that has information about the request line + channel for the device to
use. Hovewer, PnP drivers pass resources as 'struct resource', which
basically only has start and end - how do you represent all this new stuff
using 'struct resource'?
Or should we use acpi_walk_resources() where 'struct resource' is not
suitable?
--
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