On 22/02/2022 11:57:39+0100, Andrew Lunn wrote: > On Tue, Feb 22, 2022 at 09:53:25AM +0100, Clément Léger wrote: > > Le Mon, 21 Feb 2022 19:55:25 +0200, > > Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit : > > > > > On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 05:26:51PM +0100, Clément Léger wrote: > > > > Modify i2c_mux_add_adapter() to use with fwnode API to allow creating > > > > mux adapters with fwnode based devices. This allows to have a node > > > > independent support for i2c muxes. > > > > > > I^2C muxes have their own description for DT and ACPI platforms, I'm not sure > > > swnode should be used here at all. Just upload a corresponding SSDT overlay or > > > DT overlay depending on the platform. Can it be achieved? > > > > > > > Problem is that this PCIe card can be plugged either in a X86 platform > > using ACPI or on a ARM one with device-tree. So it means I should have > > two "identical" descriptions for each platforms. > > ACPI != DT. > > I know people like stuffing DT properties into ACPI tables, when ACPI > does not have a binding. But in this case, there is a well defined > ACPI mechanism for I2C muxes. You cannot ignore it because it is > different to DT. So you need to handle the muxes in both the ACPI way > and the DT way. > > For other parts of what you are doing, you might be able to get away > by just stuffing DT properties into ACPI tables. But that is not for > me to decide, that is up to the ACPI maintainers. > What I'm wondering is why you would have to stuff anything in ACPI when plugging any PCIe card in a PC. Wouldn't that be a first? I don't have to do so when plugging an Intel network card, I don't expect to have to do it when plugging any other network card... -- Alexandre Belloni, co-owner and COO, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com
