[PATCH v2 2/2] [usb] add support for ACPI identification to xhci-platform

[greg@kroah.com (Greg KH)]

On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 01:44:43PM -0600, Mark Langsdorf wrote:
> On 11/05/2014 01:11 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> >On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 07:59:32AM -0600, Mark Langsdorf wrote:
> >>>>  static struct platform_driver usb_xhci_driver = {
> >>>>  	.probe	= xhci_plat_probe,
> >>>>  	.remove	= xhci_plat_remove,
> >>>>@@ -294,6 +304,7 @@ static struct platform_driver usb_xhci_driver = {
> >>>>  		.name = "xhci-hcd",
> >>>>  		.pm = DEV_PM_OPS,
> >>>>  		.of_match_table = of_match_ptr(usb_xhci_of_match),
> >>>>+		.acpi_match_table = ACPI_PTR(usb_xhci_acpi_match),
> >>>
> >>>Shouldn't the reworked driver core code handle this differently with the
> >>>ability to handle either OF or ACPI in the same driver?
> >>
> >>I'm not sure I understand the question. With these changes, the driver
> >>handles both ACPI and DTB/OF. It's the same style of code as used
> >>in drivers/ata/plat-xgene.c, which also handles both ACPI and DTB/OF.
> >>Why do you think this code isn't correct?
> >
> >There is a new framework in the kernel that keeps a driver from having
> >to query both of and acpi to get the needed resources, it just does one
> >query and depending on the platform, everything "just works".  Shouldn't
> >that be used here as well?
> 
> Would you send me a pointer to a driver that's using this new
> framework? I can't find any references to it and all the other
> drivers that support ACPI and OF are doing it the way I'm doing
> it.

See the email on lkml:
 Subject: [PATCH v6 00/12] Add ACPI _DSD and unified device properties support

for the latest patch series.

thanks,

greg k-h