On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 06:42:33PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 04:24:54PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 12:32:26AM +0100, Daniel Scally wrote: > > > It also creates some problems to suppress the enumeration of the i2c > > > device via ACPI (which we'll have to do in a machine specific fashion, > > > because some laptops have this chip with properly configured ACPI and > > To be clear I think that's a terrible idea. > If you're talking about the ACPI implementation on those machines, > nobody disagrees :-) > To make sure I understand you correctly, do you advocate for suppressing > registration of the I2C devices from ACPI and instantiate them from > board code instead, or to somehow supplement the I2C device with > board-specific data ? No, to repeat yet again that is what I think is a terrible idea.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
