linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ACPI: support for NXP i2c controller

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 3 Sep 2019 07:41:45 +0200
From:   Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc:     Chuanhua Han <chuanhua.han@....com>,
        Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
        Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
        ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-i2c <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Leo Li <leoyang.li@....com>,
        Meenakshi Aggarwal <meenakshi.aggarwal@....com>,
        Udit Kumar <udit.kumar@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI: support for NXP i2c controller

Hi,

On 02.09.19 23:16, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 11:58 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@...nel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 12:35 PM Chuanhua Han <chuanhua.han@....com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Enable NXP i2c controller to boot with ACPI
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Meenakshi Aggarwal <meenakshi.aggarwal@....com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Udit Kumar <udit.kumar@....com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Chuanhua Han <chuanhua.han@....com>
>>
>> Wolfram, any objections to this from the i2c side?
> 
> May I propose amendment(s)?
> 
>>> @@ -44,6 +44,7 @@
>>>   #include <linux/pm_runtime.h>
>>>   #include <linux/sched.h>
>>>   #include <linux/slab.h>
> 
>>> +#include <linux/acpi.h>
> 
> If it's kept in order, better to go with it. (Yes, it is as I have checked)
> However, property.h should be included instead, see below.
> 
>>>          const struct of_device_id *of_id = of_match_device(i2c_imx_dt_ids,
>>>                                                             &pdev->dev);
>>> +       const struct acpi_device_id *acpi_id =
>>> +                       acpi_match_device(i2c_imx_acpi_ids,
>>> +                                         &pdev->dev);
> 
> 
>>>          if (of_id)
>>>                  i2c_imx->hwdata = of_id->data;
>>> +       else if (acpi_id)
>>> +               i2c_imx->hwdata = (struct imx_i2c_hwdata *)
>>> +                               acpi_id->driver_data;
> 
> 
> The above altogher may be replaced with
> 
> const struct imx_i2c_hwdata *match;
> ...
> match = device_get_match_data(&pdev->dev);
> if (match)
>   i2c_imx->hwdata = match;
> else
> ...

Instead of "may be replaced", I would say: it should be replaced :)

>>> +               .acpi_match_table = ACPI_PTR(i2c_imx_acpi_ids),
> 
> Since there is no #ifdef guard no need to use ACPI_PTR().
> 

What iMX/(other NXP?) SoCs are with ACPI support?  Where I can get one? I would like to 
know more about it.

Kind regards,
Oleksij Rempel

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |