[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56008891-9b86-f318-aae0-1ea36bc2a0eb@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 12:25:33 +0000
From: Dan Scally <djrscally@...il.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.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 02/12/2020 09:39, 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
Ah! I didn't read intel_cht_int33fe_common.c before, just the typec.c.
Having reviewed common I think I'm clear on the method now, thank you :)
>> 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.
Agree!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists