On Wed, Dec 06, 2023 at 05:07:16PM +0100, Amadeusz Sławiński wrote: > On 12/5/2023 6:22 PM, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote: ... > > > > > > > + tas2xxx_generic_fixup(cdc, action, "i2c", "INT8866"); > > > > > > > > > > > > Any specific reason to use an Intel ACPI identifier? Why not use > > > > > > "TIAS2563" ? > > Will just note that prefix should probably be TXNW (not TIAS) as discussed > recently on list. ...which should come directly from TI as it's their responsibility to allocate an ACPI ID. ... > > > > > INT8866 is in the ACPI. > > > > > I don't know why Lenovo uses this name. > > > > > I think it's more internal than intel. This is wrong (PNP) ID. ... > > > > > Name (_HID, "INT8866") // _HID: Hardware ID > > > > > > > > Ouch, I hope they checked with Intel that this isn't an HID already in > > > > use... > > > > > > > It looks the INT prefix is not reserved. (yet) > > > https://uefi.org/ACPI_ID_List?acpi_search=INT You are looking into wrong registry, and yeah, Intel used wrong PNP ID for years... > > It's been de-facto reclaimed by Intel over the years, apparently using > > INTC or INTL was too hard for some of my colleagues... > > Perhaps it should be reserved then, so it is present on above list? -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
