[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y1F6YRzRS2DR+cKL@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2022 19:42:09 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Daniel Mack <daniel@...que.org>,
Haojian Zhuang <haojian.zhuang@...il.com>,
Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@...e.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 3/6] spi: pxa2xx: Remove no more needed PCI ID table
On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 05:25:15PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 07:18:23PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 04:50:38PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > For example a check that the ID is one we know about. IIRC that bit of
> > > context looked like a tree of if statements with no particular
> > > validation.
>
> > But isn't it guaranteed to be handled by device core, i.e. we won't get driver
> > even enumerated if ID is unknown to us.
>
> That's true currently since you're matching based on ACPI ID and then
> have the lookup done with the ID information in the acpi_device_id table
> but IIRC the patch was replacing that with some device property stuff.
But that one also based on the IDs, it's not assigned without real IDs of
the devices on the certain platforms. I don't see how it's different in
this sense.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists