Re: gpio-exar: Why filtering out Commtech devices?

[Jan Kiszka]

On 2017-05-21 22:08, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> Hi Jan,
> 
> On 21/05/17 12:46, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Hi Sudip,
>>
>> why do we carry
>>
>>     if (pcidev->vendor != PCI_VENDOR_ID_EXAR)
>>         return -ENODEV;
>>
>> in gpio_exar_probe? This effectively prevents that
>>
>>     EXAR_DEVICE(COMMTECH, COMMTECH_4222PCIE, pbn_exar_XR17V35x),
>>     EXAR_DEVICE(COMMTECH, COMMTECH_4224PCIE, pbn_exar_XR17V35x),
>>     EXAR_DEVICE(COMMTECH, COMMTECH_4228PCIE, pbn_exar_XR17V35x),
>>
>> gain GPIO support. Do those devices lack access to the pins? Or can we
>> drop the filter. I don't have access to those devices, just wondering
>> because the code is not explaining the reason.
> 
> Same here. I do not have these devices and have no idea if they support
> the gpio pins or not.
> 
> Adding Matt Schulte in the Cc list, maybe he can comment.
> 
> 

If we need to keep the condition, it should be moved over to 8250_exar:
there is no point in creating the platform device at all then. But let's
wait for Matt's comment.

Jan

-- 
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RDA ITP SES-DE
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux