Add an example for the magic PRP0001 device ID which allows matching
ACPI devices against drivers using OF Device Tree compatible property.
It wasn't clear to me that PRP0001 could be used in _CID.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Preston <[email protected]>
---
Documentation/acpi/enumeration.txt | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 27 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/acpi/enumeration.txt b/Documentation/acpi/enumeration.txt
index 7bcf9c3d9fbe..391db643065a 100644
--- a/Documentation/acpi/enumeration.txt
+++ b/Documentation/acpi/enumeration.txt
@@ -410,6 +410,33 @@ Specifically, the device IDs returned by _HID and preceding PRP0001 in the _CID
return package will be checked first. Also in that case the bus type the device
will be enumerated to depends on the device ID returned by _HID.
+For example, the following ACPI sample might be used to enumerate an lm75-type
+I2C temperature sensor and match it to the driver using the Device Tree
+namespace link:
+
+ Device (TMP0)
+ {
+ Name (_HID, "TITMP75") /* _HID will appear in sysfs */
+ Name (_CID, "PRP0001")
+ Name (_DSD, Package() {
+ ToUUID("daffd814-6eba-4d8c-8a91-bc9bbf4aa301"),
+ Package () {
+ Package (2) { "compatible", "ti,tmp75" },
+ }
+ })
+ Method (_CRS, 0, Serialized)
+ {
+ Name (SBUF, ResourceTemplate ()
+ {
+ I2cSerialBusV2 (0x48, ControllerInitiated,
+ 400000, AddressingMode7Bit,
+ "\\_SB.PCI0.I2C1", 0x00,
+ ResourceConsumer, , Exclusive,)
+ })
+ Return (SBUF)
+ }
+ }
+
It is valid to define device objects with a _HID returning PRP0001 and without
the "compatible" property in the _DSD or a _CID as long as one of their
ancestors provides a _DSD with a valid "compatible" property. Such device
--
2.11.0
On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 2:47 PM Thomas Preston
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Add an example for the magic PRP0001 device ID which allows matching
> ACPI devices against drivers using OF Device Tree compatible property.
> It wasn't clear to me that PRP0001 could be used in _CID.
Mika, Andy, can you have a look at this, please?
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Preston <[email protected]>
> ---
> Documentation/acpi/enumeration.txt | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/acpi/enumeration.txt b/Documentation/acpi/enumeration.txt
> index 7bcf9c3d9fbe..391db643065a 100644
> --- a/Documentation/acpi/enumeration.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/acpi/enumeration.txt
> @@ -410,6 +410,33 @@ Specifically, the device IDs returned by _HID and preceding PRP0001 in the _CID
> return package will be checked first. Also in that case the bus type the device
> will be enumerated to depends on the device ID returned by _HID.
>
> +For example, the following ACPI sample might be used to enumerate an lm75-type
> +I2C temperature sensor and match it to the driver using the Device Tree
> +namespace link:
> +
> + Device (TMP0)
> + {
> + Name (_HID, "TITMP75") /* _HID will appear in sysfs */
> + Name (_CID, "PRP0001")
> + Name (_DSD, Package() {
> + ToUUID("daffd814-6eba-4d8c-8a91-bc9bbf4aa301"),
> + Package () {
> + Package (2) { "compatible", "ti,tmp75" },
> + }
> + })
> + Method (_CRS, 0, Serialized)
> + {
> + Name (SBUF, ResourceTemplate ()
> + {
> + I2cSerialBusV2 (0x48, ControllerInitiated,
> + 400000, AddressingMode7Bit,
> + "\\_SB.PCI0.I2C1", 0x00,
> + ResourceConsumer, , Exclusive,)
> + })
> + Return (SBUF)
> + }
> + }
> +
> It is valid to define device objects with a _HID returning PRP0001 and without
> the "compatible" property in the _DSD or a _CID as long as one of their
> ancestors provides a _DSD with a valid "compatible" property. Such device
> --
> 2.11.0
>
On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 10:31:13AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 2:47 PM Thomas Preston
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Add an example for the magic PRP0001 device ID which allows matching
> > ACPI devices against drivers using OF Device Tree compatible property.
> > It wasn't clear to me that PRP0001 could be used in _CID.
>
> Mika, Andy, can you have a look at this, please?
Looks good to me.
Acked-by: Mika Westerberg <[email protected]>
On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 10:31:13AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 2:47 PM Thomas Preston
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Add an example for the magic PRP0001 device ID which allows matching
> > ACPI devices against drivers using OF Device Tree compatible property.
> > It wasn't clear to me that PRP0001 could be used in _CID.
>
> Mika, Andy, can you have a look at this, please?
Good to me,
Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
Though one thing I would like to add (not directly related to the patch
per se), i.e. it would be nice to keep such examples under meta-acpi [1]
umbrella as a database for such excerpts.
Thomas, can you do that?
[1]: https://github.com/westeri/meta-acpi
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Preston <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > Documentation/acpi/enumeration.txt | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/acpi/enumeration.txt b/Documentation/acpi/enumeration.txt
> > index 7bcf9c3d9fbe..391db643065a 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/acpi/enumeration.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/acpi/enumeration.txt
> > @@ -410,6 +410,33 @@ Specifically, the device IDs returned by _HID and preceding PRP0001 in the _CID
> > return package will be checked first. Also in that case the bus type the device
> > will be enumerated to depends on the device ID returned by _HID.
> >
> > +For example, the following ACPI sample might be used to enumerate an lm75-type
> > +I2C temperature sensor and match it to the driver using the Device Tree
> > +namespace link:
> > +
> > + Device (TMP0)
> > + {
> > + Name (_HID, "TITMP75") /* _HID will appear in sysfs */
> > + Name (_CID, "PRP0001")
> > + Name (_DSD, Package() {
> > + ToUUID("daffd814-6eba-4d8c-8a91-bc9bbf4aa301"),
> > + Package () {
> > + Package (2) { "compatible", "ti,tmp75" },
> > + }
> > + })
> > + Method (_CRS, 0, Serialized)
> > + {
> > + Name (SBUF, ResourceTemplate ()
> > + {
> > + I2cSerialBusV2 (0x48, ControllerInitiated,
> > + 400000, AddressingMode7Bit,
> > + "\\_SB.PCI0.I2C1", 0x00,
> > + ResourceConsumer, , Exclusive,)
> > + })
> > + Return (SBUF)
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
> > It is valid to define device objects with a _HID returning PRP0001 and without
> > the "compatible" property in the _DSD or a _CID as long as one of their
> > ancestors provides a _DSD with a valid "compatible" property. Such device
> > --
> > 2.11.0
> >
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 01:51:18PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 10:31:13AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 2:47 PM Thomas Preston
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Add an example for the magic PRP0001 device ID which allows matching
> > > ACPI devices against drivers using OF Device Tree compatible property.
> > > It wasn't clear to me that PRP0001 could be used in _CID.
> >
> > Mika, Andy, can you have a look at this, please?
>
> Good to me,
> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
>
> Though one thing I would like to add (not directly related to the patch
> per se), i.e. it would be nice to keep such examples under meta-acpi [1]
> umbrella as a database for such excerpts.
>
> Thomas, can you do that?
>
> [1]: https://github.com/westeri/meta-acpi
>
> > > + Name (_HID, "TITMP75") /* _HID will appear in sysfs */
Sorry for not noticing earlier.
Is this an official ID for the chip? We discourage people to invent ACPI IDs on
their own.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Hi,
Thanks for looking at this.
On 25/03/2019 13:04, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 01:51:18PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 10:31:13AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 2:47 PM Thomas Preston
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Add an example for the magic PRP0001 device ID which allows matching
>>>> ACPI devices against drivers using OF Device Tree compatible property.
>>>> It wasn't clear to me that PRP0001 could be used in _CID.
>>>
>>> Mika, Andy, can you have a look at this, please?
>>
>> Good to me,
>> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
>>
>> Though one thing I would like to add (not directly related to the patch
>> per se), i.e. it would be nice to keep such examples under meta-acpi [1]
>> umbrella as a database for such excerpts.
>>
>> Thomas, can you do that?
>>
>> [1]: https://github.com/westeri/meta-acpi
I will :)
>>
>>>> + Name (_HID, "TITMP75") /* _HID will appear in sysfs */
>
> Sorry for not noticing earlier.
>
> Is this an official ID for the chip? We discourage people to invent ACPI IDs on
> their own.
>
>
The device is a TI tmp75b temperature sensor [0]. The HID is completely
made up, I'm afraid. It doesn't exist in the registry.
[0] http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/tmp75b.pdf
On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 02:42:09PM +0000, Thomas Preston wrote:
> On 25/03/2019 13:04, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 01:51:18PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 10:31:13AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > Though one thing I would like to add (not directly related to the patch
> > > per se), i.e. it would be nice to keep such examples under meta-acpi [1]
> > > umbrella as a database for such excerpts.
> > >
> > > Thomas, can you do that?
> > >
> > > [1]: https://github.com/westeri/meta-acpi
>
> I will :)
Thank you! I will take either GH PR, or you may send an email to maintainers,
i.e. Mika and me (PR is preferable because it would be seen publicly)
> > > > > + Name (_HID, "TITMP75") /* _HID will appear in sysfs */
> >
> > Sorry for not noticing earlier.
> >
> > Is this an official ID for the chip? We discourage people to invent ACPI IDs on
> > their own.
> The device is a TI tmp75b temperature sensor [0]. The HID is completely
> made up, I'm afraid. It doesn't exist in the registry.
Thanks for clarification. In that case I would rather recommend to use simple
PRP0001 as a _HID.
> [0] http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/tmp75b.pdf
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
On 25/03/2019 15:01, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 02:42:09PM +0000, Thomas Preston wrote:
>> On 25/03/2019 13:04, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>> On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 01:51:18PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 10:31:13AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
>>>> Though one thing I would like to add (not directly related to the patch
>>>> per se), i.e. it would be nice to keep such examples under meta-acpi [1]
>>>> umbrella as a database for such excerpts.
>>>>
>>>> Thomas, can you do that?
>>>>
>>>> [1]: https://github.com/westeri/meta-acpi
>>
>> I will :)
>
> Thank you! I will take either GH PR, or you may send an email to maintainers,
> i.e. Mika and me (PR is preferable because it would be seen publicly)
>
I will get around to this, later this week.
>>>>>> + Name (_HID, "TITMP75") /* _HID will appear in sysfs */
>>>
>>> Sorry for not noticing earlier.
>>>
>>> Is this an official ID for the chip? We discourage people to invent ACPI IDs on
>>> their own.
>
>> The device is a TI tmp75b temperature sensor [0]. The HID is completely
>> made up, I'm afraid. It doesn't exist in the registry.
>
> Thanks for clarification. In that case I would rather recommend to use simple
> PRP0001 as a _HID.
>
Alright, I will resend with this modification.
>> [0] http://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/tmp75b.pdf
>