On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 08:27:26PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 04:05:01PM +0100, Charles Keepax wrote: > > It makes sense to contain all the ACPI IRQ handling in a single helper > > function. > > > Note that this one is somewhat interesting, it seems the search > > through the resource list is done against the companion device > > of the adapter but the GPIO search is done against the companion > > device of the client. It feels to me like these really should > > be done on the same device, and certainly this is what SPI > > does (both against the equivalent of the adapter). Perhaps > > someone with more ACPI knowledge than myself could comment? > > It would be interesting to see the path how you come to this conclusion. > Apologies but I am not sure which conclusion you are referencing. Assuming it is them being called with different acpi_device's. It is perhaps me misunderstanding things but it looks like i2c_acpi_get_info implies the adev should correspond to the adapter. Where as acpi_dev_gpio_irq_get is called with the result of ACPI_COMPANION(dev) where dev is client->dev. > > acpi_dev_free_resource_list(&resource_list); > > > > + if (*irq < 0) > > + *irq = acpi_dev_gpio_irq_get(ACPI_COMPANION(&client->dev), 0); > > I think adev here is what we may use here. > Indeed that is what I would have expected as well, I will update the code to do so and hopefully any issues will come out in testing. > You may put assert here and see if it happens when you test your series. > Alas I don't have a good way to test this series, they come out of some additional work Wolfram wanted based on some issues caused by a device tree fix I made a while back. Thanks, Charles
