On Fri, Oct 06, 2023 at 09:47:57PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 6, 2023 at 8:33 PM Michal Wilczynski
> <michal.wilczynski@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
...
> > struct acpi_ac {
> > struct power_supply *charger;
> > struct power_supply_desc charger_desc;
> > - struct acpi_device *device;
> > + struct device *dev;
>
> I'm not convinced about this change.
>
> If I'm not mistaken, you only use the dev pointer above to get the
> ACPI_COMPANION() of it, but the latter is already found in _probe(),
> so it can be stored in struct acpi_ac for later use and then the dev
> pointer in there will not be necessary any more.
>
> That will save you a bunch of ACPI_HANDLE() evaluations and there's
> nothing wrong with using ac->device->handle. The patch will then
> become almost trivial AFAICS and if you really need to get from ac to
> the underlying platform device, a pointer to it can be added to struct
> acpi_ac without removing the ACPI device pointer from it.
The idea behind is to eliminate data duplication.
> > unsigned long long state;
> > struct notifier_block battery_nb;
> > };
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
