On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 10:12:51 +0300
Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 3:39 PM Jonathan Cameron <jic23@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Whilst this driver already supports explicit ACPI bindings we
> > might as well also allow for PRP0001 based binding.
> >
> > I'm also keen to remove of_match_ptr from IIO drivers to avoid
> > this (now) anti-pattern getting coppied into new drivers.
> >
>
> Code LGTM, but see below.
>
> > Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/iio/adc/ti-adc081c.c | 6 ++----
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/ti-adc081c.c b/drivers/iio/adc/ti-adc081c.c
> > index 82e524b3db88..e00350e6503f 100644
> > --- a/drivers/iio/adc/ti-adc081c.c
> > +++ b/drivers/iio/adc/ti-adc081c.c
> > @@ -18,7 +18,7 @@
> > #include <linux/err.h>
> > #include <linux/i2c.h>
> > #include <linux/module.h>
> > -#include <linux/of.h>
> > +#include <linux/mod_devicetable.h>
> > #include <linux/acpi.h>
> >
> > #include <linux/iio/iio.h>
> > @@ -230,7 +230,6 @@ static const struct i2c_device_id adc081c_id[] = {
> > };
> > MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(i2c, adc081c_id);
> >
> > -#ifdef CONFIG_OF
> > static const struct of_device_id adc081c_of_match[] = {
> > { .compatible = "ti,adc081c" },
> > { .compatible = "ti,adc101c" },
> > @@ -238,7 +237,6 @@ static const struct of_device_id adc081c_of_match[] = {
> > { }
> > };
> > MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, adc081c_of_match);
> > -#endif
> >
> > #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
> > static const struct acpi_device_id adc081c_acpi_match[] = {
>
> These IDs seem to me artificial (and non-official). Perhaps in a
> separate patch remove them?
> Or do we have confirmation (in writing) from TI that these are okay?
+CC Dan O'Donovan,
It seems highly unlikely these are 'official'.
Dan. You added them, can you give us some background (admittedly
4 years ago so you may not recall!)
Unfortunately I was rather less aware of ACPI than I have become in
the meantime, so let these in without questioning them.
If we have these out there in in the wild, we can still add a note
to make it clear that people should avoid using them in future,
or copying the approach in other drivers.
Jonathan
>
> > @@ -253,7 +251,7 @@ MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, adc081c_acpi_match);
> > static struct i2c_driver adc081c_driver = {
> > .driver = {
> > .name = "adc081c",
> > - .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(adc081c_of_match),
> > + .of_match_table = adc081c_of_match,
> > .acpi_match_table = ACPI_PTR(adc081c_acpi_match),
> > },
> > .probe = adc081c_probe,
> > --
> > 2.27.0
> >
>
>
