On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 05:38:20PM -0700, sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy wrote:
> Hi Sang
>
> Thanks for your comments. Please find my reply inline.
>
> On 06/02/2015 09:19 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> >>+#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
> >>+static void acpi_i2c_mux_register_devices(struct i2c_adapter *adap,
> >>+ struct device *mux_dev)
> >>+{
> >>+ acpi_handle handle;
> >>+ acpi_status status;
> >>+
> >>+ handle = ACPI_HANDLE(mux_dev);
> >>+ if (!handle)
> >>+ return;
> >>+
> >>+ status = acpi_walk_namespace(ACPI_TYPE_DEVICE, handle, 1,
> >>+ acpi_i2c_add_device, NULL,
> >>+ adap, NULL);
> >>+
> >>+ if (ACPI_FAILURE(status))
> >>+ dev_warn(mux_dev, "mux adapter slave enumeration fails\n");
> >>+}
> >>+#else /* !CONFIG_ACPI */
> >>+static inline void acpi_i2c_mux_register_devices(struct i2c_adapter *adap,
> >>+ struct device *mux_dev) { }
> >>+#endif /* CONFIG_ACPI */
> >IMO, this shares too much code with acpi_i2c_register_devices(). And it
> >pulls in ACPI into mux.c which is not really needed.
> Even though mux is a just a virtual adapter without any ACPI ID, Its slaves
> are a still actual devices and needs to be enumerated by ACPI. So think its
> accptable to include ACPI in mux code. Don't you agree ?
The resulting function should be called from mux code. But the function
itself should be in the core.
> Also ACPI handle code in this function is slightly different from
> acpi_i2c_register_devices() code.
The only difference I see is that one takes a device as parameter, the
other an adapter. So, you can read out the device from the adapter in
acpi_i2c_register_devices() and then call
acpi_i2c_register_devices_from_dev().
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
