2014-03-25, 09:25:30 +0200, Mika Westerberg wrote: > On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 07:31:11PM +0100, Sabrina Dubroca wrote: > > > Actually gpiolib seems to handle ->dev as optional. Can you try this patch > > > instead? Thanks. > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c > > > index bf0f8b476696..642b2bf3360e 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c > > > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c > > > @@ -501,6 +501,9 @@ void acpi_gpiochip_add(struct gpio_chip *chip) > > > acpi_handle handle; > > > acpi_status status; > > > > > > + if (!chip || !chip->dev) > > > + return; > > > + > > > handle = ACPI_HANDLE(chip->dev); > > > if (!handle) > > > return; > > > @@ -531,6 +534,9 @@ void acpi_gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip) > > > acpi_handle handle; > > > acpi_status status; > > > > > > + if (!chip || !chip->dev) > > > + return; > > > + > > > handle = ACPI_HANDLE(chip->dev); > > > if (!handle) > > > return; > > > > Thanks, this patch solves the problem. > > Great thanks for testing. Can I add your tested-by to the patch? > > I'll submit a formal patch for this next week as I'm currently on vacation. Sure: Tested-by: Sabrina Dubroca <sd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Thanks again, -- Sabrina -- 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
