Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 13 Jul 2021 19:24:45 +0100
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To:     Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
Cc:     Daniel Scally <djrscally@gmail.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Platform Driver <platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org>,
        Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>,
        Mark Gross <mgross@linux.intel.com>,
        Maximilian Luz <luzmaximilian@gmail.com>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
        kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] Add software node support to regulator framework
Message-ID: <20210713182445.GF4098@sirena.org.uk>
References: <20210712124223.GB4435@sirena.org.uk>
 <CAHp75VeyNyYSbTMgS+5tXxOZehfxt6Wws9jScKYRKQhRRGDwsg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20210712133428.GD4435@sirena.org.uk>
 <CAHp75VcQUUDdLYbpvTXSMPvjBzbHtBxywVBPS_xfY5JXyo9XxA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20210712170120.GG4435@sirena.org.uk>
 <e17af9dc-78c0-adb8-1dfb-0698e7a4e394@gmail.com>
 <20210713152454.GC4098@sirena.org.uk>
 <YO20aXWkqLgwHkku@pendragon.ideasonboard.com>
 <20210713160259.GD4098@sirena.org.uk>
 <YO25/IAD0J40R7bH@pendragon.ideasonboard.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
        protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="IvGM3kKqwtniy32b"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YO25/IAD0J40R7bH@pendragon.ideasonboard.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Precedence: bulk


--IvGM3kKqwtniy32b
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 07:06:20PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 05:02:59PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:

> > > To make sure I understand you correctly, do you advocate for suppressing
> > > registration of the I2C devices from ACPI and instantiate them from
> > > board code instead, or to somehow supplement the I2C device with
> > > board-specific data ?

> > No, to repeat yet again that is what I think is a terrible idea.

> Which of those two ? :-)

Suppressing the registration data.  Frankly the way that ACPI systems
rely so extensively on OS provided fixups on non-server systems while
still being deployed routinely there is also a substantial failure, but
it's not quite so bad.

--IvGM3kKqwtniy32b
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAABCgAdFiEEreZoqmdXGLWf4p/qJNaLcl1Uh9AFAmDt2mwACgkQJNaLcl1U
h9CzZQf/WWsaoTKwpAmcDK5OieBy/NO01P/xPTHASrZZPX/PggTwK9I53p1jcWsY
tcl5a0kjn5oSewTuaiy2/Xr3AbgiJGwNDNELdyn7xHzp3yOHlalqiNE3+iaw3DmU
BngVVe7sfg6SQnptFukN2HMmb4MyAfyZZCulQwTC+5DE/mWK8aaD0zZ+Z0vCYGoE
t2ms3qLN0St4i4X/Qty6OMelAUqDM0VSXycds3TfeWvWa790rHHvdvfzqpbD1S2B
4MSDncETZ0VA/NpkRib5G7SdMQ/eE+CYd93/mdOelK/+mN7kQ+uTnmM1uMOxD5pa
GDlx6AUVZ5Lw8nEmXqJn4uvJdqIQ/g==
=52Rr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--IvGM3kKqwtniy32b--