[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201202123540.GE4486@pendragon.ideasonboard.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 14:35:40 +0200
From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Dan Scally <djrscally@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
devel@...ica.org, rjw@...ysocki.net, lenb@...nel.org,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com,
linus.walleij@...aro.org, bgolaszewski@...libre.com,
wsa@...nel.org, yong.zhi@...el.com, sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com,
bingbu.cao@...el.com, tian.shu.qiu@...el.com, mchehab@...nel.org,
robert.moore@...el.com, erik.kaneda@...el.com, pmladek@...e.com,
rostedt@...dmis.org, sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com,
linux@...musvillemoes.dk, kieran.bingham+renesas@...asonboard.com,
jacopo+renesas@...ndi.org,
laurent.pinchart+renesas@...asonboard.com,
jorhand@...ux.microsoft.com, kitakar@...il.com,
heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 18/18] ipu3: Add driver for dummy INT3472 ACPI device
On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 11:39:52AM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 01, 2020 at 08:59:53PM +0000, Dan Scally wrote:
> > On 01/12/2020 18:49, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > > Seems we can do this, by locating intel_int3472.c under PDx86 hood and dropping
> > > ACPI ID table from TPS68470 MFD driver. The PMIC can be instantiated via
> > > i2c_acpi_new_device() (IIRC the API name).
> > >
> > > And actually it makes more sense since it's not and MFD and should not be there.
> > >
> > > (Dan, patch wise the one creates intel_int3472.c followed by another one that
> > > moves ACPI ID from PMIC and introduces its instantiation via I²C board info
> > > structure)
> >
> > I'm mostly following this, but why would we need an i2c_board_info or
> > i2c_acpi_new_device()? The INT3472 entries that refer to actual tps68470
> > devices do have an I2cSerialBusV2 enumerated in _CRS so in their case
> > there's an i2c device registered with the kernel already.
>
> Because as we discussed already we can't have two drivers for the same ID
> without a big disruption in the driver(s).
>
> If you have a single point of enumeration, it will make things much easier
> (refer to the same intel_cht_int33fe driver you mentioned earlier).
>
> I just realize that the name of int3472 should follow the same pattern, i.e.
> intel_skl_int3472.c
We're mostly focussing on Kaby Lake here though. From what I understand
the ACPI infrastructure for camera support is mostly the same on Sky
Lake, but not identical. I think a single driver should be able to cover
both though.
> > I think we need those things when we get round to handling the
> > VCM/EEPROM that's hidden within the sensor's ACPI entry, but I've not
> > done any work on that yet at all.
>
> Let's consider this later — one step at a time.
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
Powered by blists - more mailing lists