On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 11:40:13AM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote: > On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 02:17:42AM -0700, Dustin Byford wrote: > > Although I2C mux devices are easily enumerated using ACPI (_HID/_CID or > > device property compatible string match), enumerating I2C client devices > > connected through an I2C mux needs a little extra work. > > > > This change implements a method for describing an I2C device hierarchy that > > includes mux devices by using an ACPI Device() for each mux channel along > > with an _ADR to set the channel number for the device. See > > Documentation/acpi/i2c-muxes.txt for a simple example. > > > > To make this work the ismt, i801, and designware pci/platform devs now > > share an ACPI companion with their I2C adapter dev similar to how it's done > > in OF. This is done on the assumption that power management functions will > > not be called directly on the I2C dev that is sharing the ACPI node. > > > > Signed-off-by: Dustin Byford <dustin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > This looks good to me. > > You did also some stylistic changes to the drivers in question which I > think should be placed to a separate patches. I am fine with those. > Regardless of that, > > Acked-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> I would love to get a Tested-by for the designware part. Then, I could queue it for 4.4 already. > I'll leave this up to Rafael and Wolfram to decide how to go forward > with this patch. I'd think I pick both when Rafael acks patch 1 (with the unneded 'return' removed).
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
