[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201123123731.GA6322@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 12:37:31 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
alsa-devel@...a-project.org, Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
Shengjiu Wang <shengjiu.wang@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/38] ASoC: ak5558: drop of_match_ptr from of_device_id
table
On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 12:48:32PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 22, 2020 at 11:59:20AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 08:04:29PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > Surely if that's the desired outcome the fix is to change the definition
> > > of of_match_ptr() such that it leaves the reference with CONFIG_ACPI,
> > > perhaps hidden behind a config option for PRP0001? That seems better
> > > than going through the entire tree like this.
> > That could be indeed an easier way to achieve this.
> ...easier and wrong in my opinion. Not all drivers need that.
> What the point to touch it in the driver which is OF-only?
> (For IP which will quite unlikely to be present in ACPI world)
> Or if the device will get the correct ACPI ID?
That feels like something that should be done with Kconfig dependencies
like a direct OF dependency (possibly a !PRP0001 dependency?) for the
driver or possibly with having a variant of_match_ptr() for things that
really don't want to support PRP0001. Just removing all the use of
of_match_ptr() is both noisy and confusing in that it looks like it's
creating issues to fix, it makes it hard to understand when and why one
should use the macro.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists