Re: [PATCH V2] leds: pca963x: Add ACPI support

[Jacek Anaszewski]

Hi Tin,

On 11/29/2016 03:47 PM, Tin Huynh wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 6:04 PM, Mika Westerberg
> <mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 11:55:47AM +0100, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
> > > On 11/29/2016 11:21 AM, Tin Huynh wrote:
> > > > This patch enables ACPI support for leds-pca963x driver.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Tin Huynh <tnhuynh@xxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > >  drivers/leds/leds-pca963x.c |   25 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > > >  1 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > Change from V1:
> > > >   -Add CONFIG_ACPI.
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/leds/leds-pca963x.c b/drivers/leds/leds-pca963x.c
> > > > index 407eba1..57f11e3 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/leds/leds-pca963x.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/leds/leds-pca963x.c
> > > > @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@
> > > >   * or by adding the 'nxp,hw-blink' property to the DTS.
> > > >   */
> > > >
> > > > +#include <linux/acpi.h>
> > > >  #include <linux/module.h>
> > > >  #include <linux/delay.h>
> > > >  #include <linux/string.h>
> > > > @@ -95,6 +96,17 @@ struct pca963x_chipdef {
> > > >  };
> > > >  MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(i2c, pca963x_id);
> > > >
> > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
> > > > +static const struct acpi_device_id pca963x_acpi_ids[] = {
> > > > +   { "PCA9632", pca9633 },
> > > > +   { "PCA9633", pca9633 },
> > > > +   { "PCA9634", pca9634 },
> > > > +   { "PCA9635", pca9635 },
> > > > +   { }
> > > > +};
> > > > +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, pca963x_acpi_ids);
> > > > +#endif
> > > > +
> > > >  struct pca963x_led;
> > > >
> > > >  struct pca963x {
> > > > @@ -322,7 +334,17 @@ static int pca963x_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
> > > >     struct pca963x_chipdef *chip;
> > > >     int i, err;
> > > >
> > > > -   chip = &pca963x_chipdefs[id->driver_data];
> > > > +   if (id) {
> > > > +           chip = &pca963x_chipdefs[id->driver_data];
> > > > +   } else {
> > > > +           const struct acpi_device_id *acpi_id;
> > > > +
> > > > +           acpi_id = acpi_match_device(ACPI_PTR(pca963x_acpi_ids),
> > > > +                                           &client->dev);
> > >
> > > What kind of problem did you get while compiling without ACPI_PTR here,
> > > when CONFIG_ACPI is disabled? I also tried this configuration but
> > > nothing wrong happened. Also at first glance I don't see why lack of
> > > ACPI_PTR macro could cause problems.
> > >
> > > Grep also doesn't show any call to acpi_match_device
> > > with ACPI_PTR as the first argument in the existing drivers.
> >
> > Indeed, that is not needed at all.
> Sorry about that . The PATCH V1 should work fine both with or without
> CONFIG_ACPI.
> So V1 should be better . Please ignore PATCH V2

Reapplied V1.

--
Best regards,
Jacek Anaszewski