On Wed, 2014-11-05 at 17:22 +0200, Daniel Baluta wrote:
> >> @@ -1397,6 +1404,7 @@ static const struct acpi_device_id
> kx_acpi_match[] = {
> >> {"KXCJ1013", KXCJK1013},
> >> {"KXCJ1008", KXCJ91008},
> >> {"KXTJ1009", KXTJ21009},
> >> + {"SMO8500", KXCJK1013},
>
> Commit message says that your accel is KXCJ9, but here you use the
> index
> for KXCJK1013. Which one is true?
>
> >> { },
> >> };
> >> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, kx_acpi_match);
> >> @@ -1405,6 +1413,7 @@ static const struct i2c_device_id
> kxcjk1013_id[] = {
> >> {"kxcjk1013", KXCJK1013},
> >> {"kxcj91008", KXCJ91008},
> >> {"kxtj21009", KXTJ21009},
> >> + {"SMO8500", KXCJK1013},
>
> Ditto.
Missed this. Will respin a patch after testing, though the differences
in code between the 2 devices are very minimal it seems (only some PM
functionality).
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
