Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:4 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:4;
Date:   Thu, 5 Oct 2023 11:38:37 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
Cc:     linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
        Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] pinctrl: denverton: Enable platform device in the
 absence of ACPI enumeration
Message-ID: <ZR52DZDCVEV3My5T@smile.fi.intel.com>
References: <20230926190818.931951-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
 <76d1e643-9b81-4c23-8f46-73fe59913600@kernel.org>
 <CAHp75VdKF+QfSsUwVSrSEng_xY_2ZW_0t0kBuXYPPcBi3_6LxQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <cac56745-f611-48c2-bb1b-e86a3694fa59@kernel.org>
 <CAHp75VeNG3cE5XmnhPyVQmR4Ppfk7CarSahU8-5Kpgg7TwLMjg@mail.gmail.com>
 <a244d004-e354-4917-b83d-d51158ba896d@kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <a244d004-e354-4917-b83d-d51158ba896d@kernel.org>
Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Oct 05, 2023 at 09:53:51AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 04/10/2023 21:42, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 4, 2023 at 4:20 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote:
> >> On 04/10/2023 15:09, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Oct 4, 2023 at 11:18 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote:
> >>>> On 26/09/2023 21:08, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

...

> >>>>> +MODULE_ALIAS("platform:denverton-pinctrl");
> >>>>
> >>>> Why do you need the alias? It's the same as ID table. You most likely
> >>>> miss MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE() or your table is just wrong.
> >>>
> >>> This is cargo cult from pinctrl-broxton.c. If we want to fix, we need
> >>> to fix both.
> >>> Care to send patches?
> >>
> >> I don't understand how some other file affects this. Why do you exactly
> >> need module alias here? Which use-case does not work without it (after
> >> adding proper MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE())?
> > 
> > We try to keep these drivers uniform. So, if something should be done
> > differently, it should be done for all affected drivers.
> > Since patch is applied, now we have two drivers to improve.
> 
> Awesome reason. So if you add accidentally bug to one driver, it should
> be copied to other file as well.

I'm not sure where it's a bug, it works. The problem is implementation
and I believe Mika and certainly me agree with your points that
MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE() is a right way to go.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko