On Sat, May 6, 2017 at 5:21 PM, Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, May 6, 2017 at 3:45 PM, Michał Kępień <kernel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> To be fair, one thing that may be "unnatural" with this approach is that >> even though fujitsu-backlight would depend on fujitsu-laptop, it would >> still have to get a handle to FUJ02E3 using: >> >> acpi_get_handle(NULL, "\\_SB.FEXT", ...) >> >> because call_fext_func() - and thus fext_backlight() - needs to be >> passed a handle to FUJ02E3 and the two ACPI devices (FUJ02B1 handled by >> fujitsu-backlight and FUJ02E3 handled by fujitsu-laptop) are not related >> from the perspective of the ACPI device hierarchy. Unless there is a >> better way of implementing this, in which case I am open to suggestions. > > There are two areas to check with: > 1. Remote graph node > https://lwn.net/Articles/718184/ > 2. Component framework (only works in case when all devices are > mandatory to have). Ah, and third one is MFD framework. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
