On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 02:42:56PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 14:21:54 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Friday, November 16, 2012 02:03:57 PM Jean Delvare wrote:
> > > Hi Rafael,
> > >
> > > On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 11:09:03 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, November 15, 2012 01:03:17 PM Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > > > > ACPI 5 introduced I2cSerialBus resource that makes it possible to enumerate
> > > > > and configure the I2C slave devices behind the I2C controller. This patch
> > > > > adds helper functions to support I2C slave enumeration.
> > > > >
> > > > > An ACPI enabled I2C controller driver only needs to call acpi_i2c_register_devices()
> > > > > in order to get its slave devices enumerated, created and bound to the
> > > > > corresponding ACPI handle.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > Are there any objections against this patch or comments?
> > > >
> > > > Worfram? Jean? Ben?
> > >
> > > I am no longer maintaining the i2c subsystem and will not have the time
> > > to look deeply into this. All I can say is that I very happy to see
> > > this finally happen. Maybe with ACPI 5.0 we will finally be done with
> > > resource conflicts plaguing many systems for several years now.
> > >
> > > I took a quick look, and the only thing which seems suspicious is this
> > > function:
> > >
> > > > +static int acpi_i2c_find_child_address(struct acpi_resource *ares, void *data)
> > > > +{
> > > > + struct acpi_resource_i2c_serialbus *sb;
> > > > + struct acpi_i2c_find *i2c_find = data;
> > > > +
> > > > + if (ares->type != ACPI_RESOURCE_TYPE_SERIAL_BUS)
> > > > + return 1;
> > > > +
> > > > + sb = &ares->data.i2c_serial_bus;
> > > > + if (sb->type != ACPI_RESOURCE_SERIAL_TYPE_I2C)
> > > > + return 1;
> > > > +
> > > > + if (sb->slave_address == i2c_find->addr)
> > >
> > > The 7-bit and 10-bit address maps overlap, so the above isn't enough.
> > > You must compare the addresses _and_ sb->access_mode with
> > > i2c_find->access_mode (which needs to be added and filled properly.)
Ok. I wasn't sure about that and given that 10-bit addresses are not that
common I tought that we can just compare the addr to zero. I'll add the
check.
> > >
> > > > + i2c_find->found = true;
> > > > +
> > > > + return 1;
> > > > +}
> > >
> > > Plus, it seems odd that this function always returns 1.
> >
> > Yes, this is a bug I think. Mika?
>
> The equivalent function for SPI devices does the same, so if this is a
> bug, it must be fixed there too. If this is not a bug then it is
> questionable why these functions return something in the first place.
>
> But then again I didn't look into the design, so I may be missing
> something.
It is not a bug, it just means that we don't want the ACPI core to fill in
normal resources (we only want to peek the ACPI resources and find the
corresponding I2CSerialBus() resource).
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
