On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 11:23:37AM +0200, Eugene Shalygin wrote: > We need to keep some more information about the current board than just > the sensors set, and with more boards to add the dmi id array grows > quickly. Our probe code is always the same so let's switch to a custom > test code and a custom board info array. That allows us to omit board > vendor string (ASUS uses two strings that differ in case) in the board > info and use case-insensitive comparison, and also do not duplicate > sensor definitions for such board variants as " (WI-FI)" when sensors > are identical to the base variant. > > Also saves a quarter of the module size by replacing big dmi_system_id > structs with smaller ones. > > Signed-off-by: Eugene Shalygin <eugene.shalygin@xxxxxxxxx> > --- ... > > -MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(dmi, asus_ec_dmi_table); > +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, acpi_ec_ids); > module_platform_driver_probe(asus_ec_sensors_platform_driver, asus_ec_probe); Since this is now tied to MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, ...), I think the probe function should be referenced in asus_ec_sensors_platform_driver, and it should be module_platform_driver() instead of module_platform_driver_probe(). Guenter
