Hi Andy,
On Tue, Dec 01, 2020 at 08:31:39PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 11:20:55PM +0000, Dan Scally wrote:
> > On 30/11/2020 16:17, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > but the ACPI table doesn't define an I2CSerialBusV2 for it. Instead it's
> > rolled under the sensor's entry, there's a second entry in _CRS for the
> > sensor that matches the address of the new device:
> >
> >
> > Method (_CRS, 0, NotSerialized) // _CRS: Current Resource Settings
> > {
> > Name (SBUF, ResourceTemplate ()
> > {
> > I2cSerialBusV2 (0x0036, ControllerInitiated, 0x00061A80,
> > AddressingMode7Bit, "\\_SB.PCI0.I2C2",
> > 0x00, ResourceConsumer, , Exclusive,
> > )
> > I2cSerialBusV2 (0x000C, ControllerInitiated, 0x00061A80,
> > AddressingMode7Bit, "\\_SB.PCI0.I2C2",
> > 0x00, ResourceConsumer, , Exclusive,
> > )
> > })
> > Return (SBUF) /* \_SB_.PCI0.CAM0._CRS.SBUF */
> > }
> >
> > So that's another thing we need to work on. At the moment it doesn't
> > exist as far as the kernel is concerned.
>
> Maybe something along i2c-multi-instantiate can help here (maybe not).
It's two different devices really. That's also one of the "annoyances"
related to this platform. The INT* HID for the camera sensor actually
refers to a camera module, with VCM, EEPROM, ... On Chrome OS devices,
the same HID refers to the camera sensor only. *sigh* :-(
> P.S. Dan, can you drop unrelated text when replying?
I find a full quote actually useful, as it saves me from having to dig
up original e-mails to read missing parts :-) It's a matter of
preference I suppose.
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
