PING
On 06/29/2016 12:54 PM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
On 06/29/2016 12:07 PM, Tony wrote:
On 29/06/16 07:52, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
Hi Rafael,
+#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
+static const struct acpi_device_id lp3952_acpi_match[] = {
+ {LP3952_ACPI_NAME, 0},
No, you can't use "PRP0001" in this list.
+ {}
+};
+
+MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, lp3952_acpi_match);
And you don't need this for the "PRP0001" thing to work. The core will
take care of it for you then.
+#endif
So the entire ACPI block can be dropped for now.
And the driver doesn't have to depend on CONFIG_ACPI any more, does it?
The driver currently supports probing only with ACPI.
I have one question BTW: isn't there anything similar to the device tree
bindings documentation required for ACPI overlays?
Pointer to the discussion which led us to this solution:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-leds/msg06230.html
_DSD is working now. I managed to get "PRP0001" working as suggested by
Rafael in
http://marc.info/?l=linux-acpi&m=146711623115228&w=2
with _DSD
Thanks for the link.
Rafael, "Package" entries seem to mimic Device Tree properties defined
in the common leds bindings. Would it be possible to make it even
more compatible and define every LED connected to the LED controller
in the form of a child node, similarly as in case of LED DT bindings?
See Documentation/devicetree/bindings/leds/common.txt and other
bindings in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/leds.
I will try adding names using _DSD. I am not sure why DSD didn't work
earlier. The only reason I could think of is, upgrading my OS recently
following a raid failure.
--
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
--
Best regards,
Jacek Anaszewski
--
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
