On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 09:49:35AM +0100, Charles Keepax wrote:
> It makes sense to contain all the ACPI IRQ handling in a single helper
> function.
>
> Signed-off-by: Charles Keepax <ckeepax@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>
> Note that this one is somewhat interesting, it seems the search
> through the resource list is done against the companion device
> of the adapter but the GPIO search is done against the companion
> device of the client. It feels to me like these really should
> be done on the same device, and certainly this is what SPI
> does (both against the equivalent of the adapter). Perhaps
> someone with more ACPI knowledge than myself could comment?
What GPIO search you mean? I did not find any ACPI specific GPIO lookup
in the i2c-core-acpi/base files.
> Thanks,
> Charles
>
> drivers/i2c/i2c-core-acpi.c | 3 +++
> drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c | 4 ----
> 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/i2c-core-acpi.c b/drivers/i2c/i2c-core-acpi.c
> index e332760bf9ebc..0c882d956e9a4 100644
> --- a/drivers/i2c/i2c-core-acpi.c
> +++ b/drivers/i2c/i2c-core-acpi.c
> @@ -164,6 +164,9 @@ int i2c_acpi_get_irq(struct i2c_client *client, int *irq)
Maybe worth adding kernel-doc explaining what the function does if it
does not have already.
>
> acpi_dev_free_resource_list(&resource_list);
>
> + if (*irq < 0)
> + *irq = acpi_dev_gpio_irq_get(ACPI_COMPANION(&client->dev), 0);
> +
> return 0;
> }
>
> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c b/drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c
> index c1afa17a76bfc..f958b50c78c04 100644
> --- a/drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c
> +++ b/drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c
> @@ -336,10 +336,6 @@ static int i2c_device_probe(struct device *dev)
> irq = of_irq_get(dev->of_node, 0);
> } else if (ACPI_COMPANION(dev)) {
> i2c_acpi_get_irq(client, &irq);
I think we should check and handle possible error here.
> -
> - if (irq == -ENOENT)
> - irq = acpi_dev_gpio_irq_get(ACPI_COMPANION(dev),
> - 0);
> }
> if (irq == -EPROBE_DEFER)
> return irq;
> --
> 2.11.0
