Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758912AbcDAOJc (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Apr 2016 10:09:32 -0400 Received: from mezzanine.sirena.org.uk ([106.187.55.193]:35536 "EHLO mezzanine.sirena.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751067AbcDAOJ3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Apr 2016 10:09:29 -0400 Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2016 07:08:56 -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 , linux-spi@vger.kernel.org, lkml , Irina Tirdea Message-ID: <20160401140856.GW2350@sirena.org.uk> References: <1459417026-6697-1-git-send-email-octavian.purdila@intel.com> <1459417026-6697-7-git-send-email-octavian.purdila@intel.com> <20160331172935.GL2350@sirena.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="hjRTvux2945W8dyK" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Cookie: If anything can go wrong, it will. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 12.139.153.2 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: 1484 Lines: 40 --hjRTvux2945W8dyK Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 01:54:28PM +0300, Octavian Purdila wrote: > I probably don't fully understand your question, but I don't see a way > of how we can create a new SPI device from generic ACPI code. For > example, in acpi_spi_add_device() we need the spi_master node so that > we can allocate the spi device. Right, but the same applies to initial enumeration so we also have to manually instantiate ACPI devices on startup. Why do we need to do that? > The handling is identical because we don't have yet have a way to > identify what where the new nodes added when a new ACPI table / > overlay has been loaded, so we have to rescan the ACPI namespace under > each controller. That's not the point. The point is that since the handling is identical why are we handling it through exactly the same code? --hjRTvux2945W8dyK Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJW/oD0AAoJECTWi3JdVIfQaRAH/jeQz8zKvAX6aepL5CfzNu3V o6yItlKEvj0noTBht+Qpw2MRWvpjZHMEWGV5XEmLZC3S7ft8apurWTGDppJkRsf+ I1fSxifDFMoEhMA3tN39ruRBcSajBrF7zroElYR6WgTbtcbSPYtxCAJHbjHdJyEB /XG6bSk4due7Vezl/jKE0ap/hOWXa3qBzfA7rXIWWw+TbvtyYXlHSJHdZZttRH07 gVNcsLhfRBwp8EqbSnUM3WxvVx6xMTsNtKLnu1q4e9YNL69ZbS0MpEIoNBOJJnl9 97WntPF+mgoufsRLvnUFkggxHZu1Q1a0oO4kWezuYmgqvXzoNc+XDvamSJ3LsX0= =PJGW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --hjRTvux2945W8dyK--