[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75Ves4VZHRWGW9hP1cz-Cytx_c2GsK3BHuNiCyRqCufB1Hg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2022 17:15:48 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>
Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 4/4] bus: hisi_lpc: Don't guard ACPI IDs with ACPI_PTR()
On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 5:02 PM John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com> wrote:
> On 05/07/2022 12:43, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > The OF is not guarded, neither ACPI needs.
>
> This doesn't read well.
"The OF is not guarded, neither ACPI needs it."
Better? Otherwise please propose how it can be amended here.
> > The IDs do not depend
> > to the configuration. Hence drop ACPI_PTR() from the code and
> > move ID table closer to its user.
>
> Do you need to explicitly include mod_devicetable.h, which has the
> definition of acpi_device_id?
>
> I saw a similar change for another driver and it was claimed that
> including mod_devicetable.h was required.
Strictly speaking, yes we need mod_devicetable.h. But of.h and acpi.h
include it.
What you have seen is probably dropping of.h and/or acpi.h completely
from the user. In such cases the mod_devicetable.h is compulsory.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists