+-----Original Message----- +From: Jacek Anaszewski [mailto:j.anaszewski@xxxxxxxxxxx] +Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2016 3:18 PM +To: Tin Huynh +Cc: Mika Westerberg; Rafael J. Wysocki; Richard Purdie; linux- +leds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux- +acpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Loc Ho; Thang Nguyen; Phong Vo; patches +Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] leds: pca955x: Add ACPI support for pca955x + +On 11/30/2016 09:06 AM, Tin Huynh wrote: +> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Jacek Anaszewski +> <j.anaszewski@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: +>> +>> On 11/30/2016 08:51 AM, Jacek Anaszewski wrote: +>>> +>>> Hi Tin, +>>> +>>> How this patch is different from the one already merged? +>>> +>>> Best regards, +>>> Jacek Anaszewski +>>> Hi Jacek, I am answering on behalf of Tin. This patch is for the leds:pca955x driver while the previous one was for leds:pca963x driver! They are almost the same in the coding construct, but different drivers. +>>> On 11/30/2016 04:08 AM, Tin Huynh wrote: +>>>> +>>>> This patch enables ACPI support for leds-pca955x driver. +>>>> +>>>> Signed-off-by: Tin Huynh <tnhuynh@xxxxxxx> +>>>> --- +>>>> drivers/leds/leds-pca955x.c | 22 +++++++++++++++++++++- +>>>> 1 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) +>>>> +>>>> Change from V2: +>>>> -Correct coding conventions. +>>>> +>>>> Change from V1: +>>>> -Remove CONFIG_ACPI. +>>>> +>>>> diff --git a/drivers/leds/leds-pca955x.c +>>>> b/drivers/leds/leds-pca955x.c index 840401a..b168ebe 100644 +>>>> --- a/drivers/leds/leds-pca955x.c +>>>> +++ b/drivers/leds/leds-pca955x.c +>>>> @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ +>>>> * bits the chip supports. +>>>> */ +>>>> +>>>> +#include <linux/acpi.h> +>>>> #include <linux/module.h> +>>>> #include <linux/delay.h> +>>>> #include <linux/string.h> +>>>> @@ -100,6 +101,15 @@ struct pca955x_chipdef { }; +>>>> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(i2c, pca955x_id); +>>>> +>>>> +static const struct acpi_device_id pca955x_acpi_ids[] = { +>>>> + { .id = "PCA9550", .driver_data = pca9550 }, +>>>> + { .id = "PCA9551", .driver_data = pca9551 }, +>>>> + { .id = "PCA9552", .driver_data = pca9552 }, +>>>> + { .id = "PCA9553", .driver_data = pca9553 }, +>>>> + { } +>> +>> +>> OK, I see that you brought back explicit properties in the structure +>> initializer. Is there some vital reason for that? It's not vital, but to make it consistent with what was done for pca963x, and also per suggestion by Mika on reviewing a different driver mux:954x in another thread. I would think this would make the definition clearer. +>> You're mentioning "correcting coding conventions" in the patch +>> changelog. checkpatch.pl --strict doesn't complain about that, so +>> what coding conventions you have on mind? +> +> +>> +>> +>>>> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, pca955x_acpi_ids); +>>>> + +>>>> struct pca955x { +>>>> struct mutex lock; +>>>> struct pca955x_led *leds; +>>>> @@ -250,7 +260,16 @@ static int pca955x_probe(struct i2c_client +*client, +>>>> struct led_platform_data *pdata; +>>>> int i, err; +>>>> +>>>> - chip = &pca955x_chipdefs[id->driver_data]; +>>>> + if (id) { +>>>> + chip = &pca955x_chipdefs[id->driver_data]; +>>>> + } else { +>>>> + const struct acpi_device_id *acpi_id; +> +> I added '{}' follow if + +You had it already in V1. Please verify if the patch applied to the for- +next branch of linux-leds.git has the shape you intended: + +https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/j.anaszewski/linux- +leds.git/commit/?h=for-next&id=e46895b71a26da404c4d95cb2bab1a67cf8b20bc + +-- +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