On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 05:17:12PM +0300, Raag Jadav wrote: > On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 01:12:02PM +0300, Raag Jadav wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 11:18:55AM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 02:03:35PM +0530, Raag Jadav wrote: > > > > Now that we have a standard ACPI helper, we can use acpi_dev_uid_match() > > > > for matching _UID as per the original logic before commit 2a036e489eb1 > > > > ("ACPI: LPSS: Refactor _UID handling to use acpi_dev_uid_to_integer()"), > > > > instead of treating it as an integer. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Raag Jadav <raag.jadav@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Acked-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > The change still looks good to me, however I wonder if we could maybe > > > improve acpi_dev_uid_match() to support both data types possible for > > > _UID? This of course is separate patch (unless there are objections). > > > > > > There is the _Generic() thing and I think that can be used to make > > > > > > acpi_dev_uid_match() > > > > > > which takes either u64 (or maybe even unsigned int) or const char * and > > > based on that picks the correct implementation. Not sure if that's > > > possible, did not check but it would allow us to use one function > > > everywhere instead of acpi_dev_uid_to_integer() and > > > acpi_dev_uid_match(). > > > > The way I see it, acpi_dev_uid_to_integer() is useful when drivers want to > > parse _UID and store it in their private data, so that it is available for > > making various decisions throughout the lifetime of the driver, as opposed > > to acpi_dev_uid_match() which is more useful for oneshot comparisons in my > > opinion. > > > > So I'm a bit conflicted about merging them into a single helper, unless > > ofcourse there is a way to serve both purposes. > > Or perhaps something like, > > bool acpi_dev_uid_match(struct acpi_device *adev, const void *uid2, enum uid_type type) > { > u64 uid1_d, uid2_d; > > if (type == UID_TYPE_STR) { > char *uid2_s = (char *)uid2; > if (!(uid2_s && !kstrtou64(uid2_s, 0, &uid2_d))) > return false; > } else if (type == UID_TYPE_INT) { > u64 *uid2_p; > uid2_p = (u64 *)uid2; > uid2_d = *uid2_p; > } else { > return false; > } > > if (!acpi_dev_uid_to_integer(adev, &uid1_d) && uid1_d == uid2_d) > return true; > else > return false; > } > > Although this looks unnecessarily hideous. Indeed, but using the _Generic() you should be able to have a single acpi_dev_uid_match() to work for either type so: acpi_dev_uid_match(adev, "1") and acpi_dev_uid_match(adev, 1) would both work with type checkings etc. Not sure if this is worth the trouble though.