Hi Lukas,
>>>> --- a/include/acpi/acpi_bus.h
>>>> +++ b/include/acpi/acpi_bus.h
>>>> @@ -211,7 +211,7 @@ struct acpi_device_flags {
>>>> u32 of_compatible_ok:1;
>>>> u32 coherent_dma:1;
>>>> u32 cca_seen:1;
>>>> - u32 spi_i2c_slave:1;
>>>> + u32 serial_slave:1;
>>>> u32 reserved:19;
>>>> };
>>> I am not an ACPI expert, but wouldn't we better have a serial_bus_slave
>>> here. And the serial_bus_slave can be either UART or I2C? Or have a
>>> pretty good commit message explaining why this is serial_slave only.
>>
>> I will rename it.
>> serial_bus_slave can be either SPI, I2C or UART
>> (cf. http://elixir.free-electrons.com/linux/latest/source/include/acpi/acrestyp.h#L446).
>
> Another idea would be to describe the *effect*, rather than the devices
> affected, i.e. something like:
>
> - u32 spi_i2c_slave:1;
> + u32 parent_enumerated:1;
>
> such that it could be extended to slaves on a non-serial bus in the
> future.
that might work as well. However right now I would be fine with serial_bus_slave here. Since that makes it clear that this is more than just UART devices. It is generic serial bus based devices.
Regards
Marcel
--
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
