[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZBCYVNmoo2EdDY90@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2023 17:52:52 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: "Ye, Xiang" <xiang.ye@...el.com>
Cc: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@...nel.org>,
Tyrone Ting <kfting@...oton.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
srinivas.pandruvada@...el.com, sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com,
zhifeng.wang@...el.com, wentong.wu@...el.com, lixu.zhang@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/5] usb: Add support for Intel LJCA device
On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 11:38:14PM +0800, Ye, Xiang wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 10:36:57AM +0200, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 04:03:26PM +0800, Ye, Xiang wrote:
...
> > You don't really seem to get any benefit from MFD. Perhaps it would be
> > more appropriate and clear if you just registered auxiliary devices in
> > this driver. Check drivers/base/auxiliary.c.
> Yes, it should be a work. I have a question.
> MFD provides the ACPI binding for sub-devices through
> struct mfd_cell_acpi_match. But I didn't see this in drivers/base/auxiliary.c.
> If using auxiliary bus to implement the LJCA sub-devices, we need to do
> the sub-devices acpi binding manually in ljca.c.
>
> Something Like:
> adr = LJCA_ACPI_MATCH_GPIO
> adev = acpi_find_child_device(parent, adr, false);
> ACPI_COMPANION_SET(&pdev->dev, adev ?: parent);
>
> Is that acceptable?
Maybe you can implement this on the level of auxiliary bus.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists