On Mon, 15 Apr 2024 17:18:52 +0300
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The commit in question does not proove that ACPI ID exists.
> Quite likely it was a cargo cult addition while doint that
> for DT-based enumeration. Drop most likely fake ACPI ID.
>
> Googling for STK3335 gives no useful results in regard to DSDT.
>
> Fixes: 677f16813a92 ("iio: light: stk3310: Add support for stk3335")
> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Hi Andy,
It's been there quite a while (5 years) so whilst I agree it should
never have gone in without a known DSDT in the wild, I'm not sure we
should remove it at this point.
Definitely not with a fixes tag as I don't want to see this picked up
for stable and breaking some old consumer device we don't know about.
If there is a good maintenance reason to scrap these I'm in favour,
but if it's just tidying up errors from the past that have no
real impact then I'm not so sure.
Maybe we need a 'deprecated' marking for acpi ids that always prints
a message telling people not to make them up. Mind you what would that
do beyond make us feel better?
Jonathan
> ---
> drivers/iio/light/stk3310.c | 1 -
> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/light/stk3310.c b/drivers/iio/light/stk3310.c
> index 7b71ad71d78d..08d471438175 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/light/stk3310.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/light/stk3310.c
> @@ -693,7 +693,6 @@ MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(i2c, stk3310_i2c_id);
> static const struct acpi_device_id stk3310_acpi_id[] = {
> {"STK3310", 0},
> {"STK3311", 0},
> - {"STK3335", 0},
> {}
> };
>
