[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180130160107.000006df@huawei.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 16:01:07 +0000
From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
CC: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...23.retrosnub.co.uk>,
Jeremy Cline <jeremy@...ine.org>,
Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@....de>,
Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@...erw.net>,
"Hans de Goede" <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
Lars Kellogg-Stedman <lars@...bit.com>,
"Steven Presser" <steve@...ssers.name>,
Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>, <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] iio: accel: bmc150: Check for a second ACPI device
for BOSC0200
On Mon, 29 Jan 2018 16:07:02 +0200
Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 11:40 AM, Jonathan Cameron
> <jic23@...23.retrosnub.co.uk> wrote:
> > On Sun, 14 Jan 2018 10:43:30 +0000
> > Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org> wrote:
> >> On Tue, 9 Jan 2018 21:24:01 +0000
> >> Jeremy Cline <jeremy@...ine.org> wrote:
> >> > On 12/10/2017 12:21 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> >> > > On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 17:52:34 +0000
> >> > > Jeremy Cline <jeremy@...ine.org> wrote:
>
> >> > >> Some BOSC0200 acpi_device-s describe two accelerometers in a single ACPI
> >> > >> device. Check for a companion device and handle a second i2c_client
> >> > >> if it is present.
>
> >> > I didn't see this land anywhere (I was looking in
> >> > git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jic23/iio.git, maybe that's not
> >> > the right place?) and I just wanted to make sure this didn't get lost in
> >> > the holiday shuffle.
> >> It did indeed get lost - thanks for the reminder. Now applied to the
> >> togreg branch of iio.git. However, unfortunately we may be too near
> >> to the merge window opening for it to make it. Depends on what Linus
> >> says later today when rc8 comes out.
> >
> > I've added some #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI defenses against the case
> > of no ACPI support being compiled in. Alternative would be to add
> > stubs for those functions that don't have them...
> >
> > probably just acpi_device_hid.
> >
> > But that would take much longer. Feel free to propose it and a patch
> > removing the ifdef fun if you like!
>
> Where can I see the patch?
>
Doh. I clearly forgot to push out. Should be able to push to
iio.git on kernel.org later.
Jonathan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists