Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757889AbcCaRaE (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Mar 2016 13:30:04 -0400 Received: from mezzanine.sirena.org.uk ([106.187.55.193]:60954 "EHLO mezzanine.sirena.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753337AbcCaRaA (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Mar 2016 13:30:00 -0400 Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 10:29:35 -0700 From: Mark Brown To: Octavian Purdila Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Len Brown , Matt Fleming , Wolfram Sang , Joel Becker , Christoph Hellwig , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-spi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, irina.tirdea@intel.com Message-ID: <20160331172935.GL2350@sirena.org.uk> References: <1459417026-6697-1-git-send-email-octavian.purdila@intel.com> <1459417026-6697-7-git-send-email-octavian.purdila@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="vYlOGI1a8wP+YbIl" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1459417026-6697-7-git-send-email-octavian.purdila@intel.com> X-Cookie: If anything can go wrong, it will. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 64.55.107.4 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: broonie@sirena.org.uk Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 06/10] spi: add support for ACPI reconfigure notifications X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:24:06 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mezzanine.sirena.org.uk) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1221 Lines: 37 --vYlOGI1a8wP+YbIl Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 12:37:02PM +0300, Octavian Purdila wrote: > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ACPI) > +static int acpi_spi_table_load(struct device *dev, const void *data) > +{ > + struct spi_master *master = container_of(dev, struct spi_master, dev); > + > + acpi_register_spi_devices(master); > + return 0; > +} Why do we have a separate code path for this coompared to the initial startup? The handling appears to be identical so it seems we should drive this from the ACPI code so we don't have to add this to every single bus with ACPI bindings. --vYlOGI1a8wP+YbIl Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJW/V50AAoJECTWi3JdVIfQaYwH/1w1D1N5NRZxoG8yE8B48DU6 dPRkmhxGlcoz5A0COfqjPMbEdccEcSod1bNjAzoBdIElblKWkpqakv55oLU81Gbc mkVkVVusnB7QGrc9dsw9PY2ydDlP4CM9UWcxPUa3SHGnS0L2fUy82Vq5rkc5Fss4 8vW8W6GSVRGfATDsZlLegCP4GiKCEO68EbqZXm2gXQEQuphn4dRGHc+Wk+1hfMiF VGt1hVL/edlU8EDRGeLYN548OYrkbRPQjkq1YI2+JmYj3mRO8/vDj60hvajQ04hd 3mQcwrkNAXn+6vmgl8ZP+FiFAHcUpxHB3Py5djkRqPfuN9HdSzstJleGX4VtvuA= =57Lr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --vYlOGI1a8wP+YbIl--