[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200826183603.GP4965@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 19:36:03 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Cc: Kuldip Dwivedi <kuldip.dwivedi@...esoftware.com>,
Qiang Zhao <qiang.zhao@....com>, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Pankaj Bansal <pankaj.bansal@....com>,
Varun Sethi <V.Sethi@....com>,
Tanveer Alam <tanveer.alam@...esoftware.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Add ACPI support
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 09:30:44PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 06:02:05PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > That's not something that it's particularly idiomatic to actually use in
> > ACPI and you end up with the same namespacing problem assigning IDs so
> > I'm not sure it makes life any better.
> So what's the idiomatic thing to do in this case, allocate the first
> free PNP ID now for DSPI controller on LS2085A, then another one for
> DSPI on LX2160A later, etc etc?
AFAICT yes, assuming you don't make it look like a PCI device and
enumerate that way which is more how these things more normally end up
getting done.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists