Re: [PATCH v20 1/4] usb: Add support for Intel LJCA device

[Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

On 10/16/23 07:52, Wu, Wentong wrote:
>> From: Hans de Goede <hdegoede>
>>
>> Hi Andy,
>>
>> On 10/13/23 22:05, Shevchenko, Andriy wrote:
>>> On Thu, Oct 12, 2023 at 01:14:23PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>> Ah ok, I see. So the code:
>>>>
>>>> 1. First tries to find the matching child acpi_device for the auxdev
>>>> by ADR
>>>>
>>>> 2. If 1. fails then falls back to HID + UID matching
>>>>
>>>> And there are DSDTs which use either:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Only use _ADR to identify which child device is which, like the example
>>>>    DSDT snippet from the commit msg.
>>>>
>>>> 2. Only use _HID + _UID like the 2 example DSDT snippets from me
>>>> email
>>>>
>>>> But there never is a case where both _ADR and _HID are used at the
>>>> same time (which would be an ACPI spec violation as Andy said).
>>>>
>>>> So AFAICT there is no issue here since  _ADR and _HID are never user
>>>> at the same time and the commit message correctly describes scenario
>>>> 1. from above, so the commit message is fine too.
>>>>
>>>> So I believe that we can continue with this patch series in its
>>>> current v20 form, which has already been staged for going into -next
>>>> by Greg.
>>>>
>>>> Andy can you confirm that moving ahead with the current version is ok
>>>> ?
>>>
>>> Yes as we have a few weeks to fix corner cases.
>>>
>>> What I'm worrying is that opening door for _ADR that seems never used
>>> is kinda an overkill here (resolving non-existing problem).
>>
>> I assume that there actually some DSDTs using the _ADR approach and that this
>> support is not there just for fun.
> 
> right, it's not for fun, we use _ADR here is to reduce the maintain effort because
> currently it defines _HID for every new platform and the drivers have to be updated
> accordingly, while _ADR doesn't have that problem.

Hmm, this sounds to me like _ADR is currently not actually being used in any
shipping DSDTs ?

Adding support for it to the driver seems a bit premature then IMHO ?

Also HIDs can perfectly be re-used for compatible hardware in
a newer generation so that is really not a good argument to use _ADR
instead.

Regards,

Hans