On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 05:52:16PM +0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > Em Fri, 26 Jun 2020 18:00:21 +0300 > Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> escreveu: > > > On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 04:04:52PM +0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > > > Those patches are meant to improve device detection by the atomisp driver, > > > relying on ACPI bios when possible. > > > > > > It also adds a basis for using ACPI PM, but only if the DSDT tables have > > > a description about how to turn on the resources needed by the cameras. > > > > > > At least on the device I'm using for tests, this is not the case. > > > > Is this in your experimental tree? > > Yes. > > > I'll rebase mine on top and test. > > After I will send the rest from my series and give a tag to this. > > It would be helpful if you could test removing the DMI match table from > your board. If your device has a DSDT table close to the one I have, the > new code may be able to get everything from DSDT. I have checked the atomisp_v5 branch and it doesn't bring any regression to my case. So, feel free to add Tested-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> I'll send rebased patches soon. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
