[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAE1zot+LuQJGrDrEDM2iVv-omz3Sg6k3bavX+5gde8jzrK0pog@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2016 22:37:57 +0300
From: Octavian Purdila <octavian.purdila@...el.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
Joel Becker <jlbec@...lplan.org>,
"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, linux-i2c <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-spi <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Irina Tirdea <irina.tirdea@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 06/10] spi: add support for ACPI reconfigure notifications
On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 8:42 PM, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 01:39:04AM +0300, Octavian Purdila wrote:
>
>> + switch (value) {
>> + case ACPI_RECONFIG_DEVICE_ADD:
>> + master = acpi_spi_find_master_by_adev(adev->parent);
>> + if (!master)
>> + break;
>> +
>> + acpi_register_spi_device(master, adev);
>> + put_device(&master->dev);
>> + break;
>> + case ACPI_RECONFIG_DEVICE_REMOVE:
>> + spi = acpi_spi_find_device_by_adev(adev);
>> + if (!spi)
>> + break;
>
> There's more code here now than I remember but this all looks *really*
> close to the DT code except for the OF_POPULATED flag that we set when
> things are instantiated in DT. The duplication seems bad but the fact
> that we're missing the flag worries me... do we have guarantees that
> ACPI won't double register?
We use the adev->flags.visited to check when a device has been already
enumerated, and we skip registering a new SPI slave in that case.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists