On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 9:32 PM, Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 02:49:13PM +0300, Octavian Purdila wrote: > >> If we really want to have a single path for ACPI enumeration we could >> do that by using an ACPI SPI bridge driver or scan handlers after >> extending the matching mechanisms. But we would still need to modify >> the SPI subsystem and I don't think its worth it just to save a call >> to acpi_register_spi_devices() from spi_register_master(). > > It's not specifically for SPI, it's the fact that you're asking every > single bus type which might be described in ACPI to handle both hotplug > and coldplug paths separately. Given that the code that's being added > just seems like trivial boilerplate it seems like we're doing this > wrong, we should be factoring this out so there's nothing bus types can > get wrong. > AFAICS this is exactly the same case for DT: one code path for coldplug and one for hotplug. Which makes me think that it is not possible to have a single path for both, or maybe its not worth it. Do I miss something obvious? -- 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
