On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 11:39:52AM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Tue, Dec 01, 2020 at 08:59:53PM +0000, Dan Scally wrote: > > On 01/12/2020 18:49, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > ... > > > > Seems we can do this, by locating intel_int3472.c under PDx86 hood and dropping > > > ACPI ID table from TPS68470 MFD driver. The PMIC can be instantiated via > > > i2c_acpi_new_device() (IIRC the API name). > > > > > > And actually it makes more sense since it's not and MFD and should not be there. > > > > > > (Dan, patch wise the one creates intel_int3472.c followed by another one that > > > moves ACPI ID from PMIC and introduces its instantiation via I²C board info > > > structure) > > > > I'm mostly following this, but why would we need an i2c_board_info or > > i2c_acpi_new_device()? The INT3472 entries that refer to actual tps68470 > > devices do have an I2cSerialBusV2 enumerated in _CRS so in their case > > there's an i2c device registered with the kernel already. > > Because as we discussed already we can't have two drivers for the same ID > without a big disruption in the driver(s). > > If you have a single point of enumeration, it will make things much easier > (refer to the same intel_cht_int33fe driver you mentioned earlier). > > I just realize that the name of int3472 should follow the same pattern, i.e. > intel_skl_int3472.c We're mostly focussing on Kaby Lake here though. From what I understand the ACPI infrastructure for camera support is mostly the same on Sky Lake, but not identical. I think a single driver should be able to cover both though. > > I think we need those things when we get round to handling the > > VCM/EEPROM that's hidden within the sensor's ACPI entry, but I've not > > done any work on that yet at all. > > Let's consider this later — one step at a time. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart
