Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1660649244-146842-1-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com> <1660649244-146842-3-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <1660649244-146842-3-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com>
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 18 Aug 2022 22:41:13 +0300
Message-ID: <CAHp75VdhCovo1uT3oxQAymEO9X+29oDet7LjYkLvpmj+r15Tfg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH PoC 2/3] ACPI: platform: Refactor acpi_create_platform_device()
To:     John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
Cc:     Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
        ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linuxarm <linuxarm@huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 2:33 PM John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com> wrote:
>
> There is commonality between acpi_create_platform_device() and
> hisi_lpc_acpi_add_child(), in that it covers 2x main steps:
> - Read resources for the acpi_device
> - Create platform device
>
> Refactor acpi_create_platform_device() so that it may be reused by
> hisi_lpc_acpi_add_child() to reduce duplication.

...

> + * acpi_create_platform_device_ops - Create platform device for ACPI device node

Not sure I understand why _ops is a suffix for the function. I would
expect _ops to be a data struct where the ->xlate() and perhaps other
callbacks may be collected. It may be that I have missed that portion
in the previous discussion.

...

> +       if (name)
> +               pdevinfo.name = name;
> +       else
> +               pdevinfo.name = dev_name(&adev->dev);

> +       pdevinfo.data = data;
> +       pdevinfo.size_data = size_data;

It rather reminds me of platform device registration full with this
device info. May be what you need is
struct acpi_platfrom_device_info {
  properties;
  name;
  id;
  ->xlate();
  ...
};

?

...

> +struct platform_device *acpi_create_platform_device_ops(
> +                               struct acpi_device *adev,
> +                               const char *name,
> +                               const struct property_entry *properties,
> +                               void *data, size_t size_data,
> +                               int (*xlat)(struct acpi_device *adev,
> +                                           struct resource *res,
> +                                           void *data, size_t size_data),
> +                               int id);

...because this looks  a bit too much from the amount of parameters
point of view.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko