Hi Andy,
Thank you for the patch set.
CC also the author and kernel ACPI guys.
On 3/15/19 8:13 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
The similar to the commit e88162f9dad426f3c83e23150b7f28b7d9486df8
("Revert "i2c: mux: pca954x: Add ACPI support for pca954x"")
remove non-official ACPI IDs from LED drivers.
This should be a de facto state until somebody shows either
official letter from NXP about matter or DSDT dump (with
machine / motherboard model) which has a such.
Andy Shevchenko (2):
leds: pca963x: Revert "Add ACPI support"
leds: pca955x: Revert "Add ACPI support"
drivers/leds/leds-pca955x.c | 22 +---------------------
drivers/leds/leds-pca963x.c | 22 +---------------------
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 42 deletions(-)
I have one general question - is the problem in the lack of official
announcement for these ACPI IDs? Or maybe some of the pca9xxx devices
available on the market support different IDs? If neither of the above
is the case then is there any other legal reason for not having this
support in the kernel, even if it reportedly works for some pieces
of the hardware?
--
Best regards,
Jacek Anaszewski
