[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZP7ored2UfXcFUvz@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2023 13:15:09 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Biju Das <biju.das.jz@...renesas.com>
Cc: Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Biju Das <biju.das.au@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] power: supply: bq24257_charger: Make chip type and
name in sync
On Sun, Sep 10, 2023 at 07:10:06AM +0000, Biju Das wrote:
> Hi Andy Shevchenko,
> > On Sat, Sep 02, 2023 at 08:33:30PM +0100, Biju Das wrote:
...
> > > - if (ACPI_HANDLE(dev)) {
> > > - acpi_id = acpi_match_device(dev->driver->acpi_match_table,
> > > - &client->dev);
> > > - if (!acpi_id) {
> > > - dev_err(dev, "Failed to match ACPI device\n");
> > > - return -ENODEV;
> > > - }
> > > - bq->chip = (enum bq2425x_chip)acpi_id->driver_data;
> > > - } else {
> > > - bq->chip = (enum bq2425x_chip)id->driver_data;
> > > - }
> >
> > Do we still need acpi.h after this change?
>
> Yes, it is still needed as it is using
> ACPI_PTR.
Can we, please, drop ACPI_PTR() as it's more harmful than useful (same way as
you dropped the ifdeffery for OF cases in other patches)?
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists