From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mika Westerberg Subject: Re: Fwd: Hid over I2C and ACPI interaction Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 08:52:34 +0300 Message-ID: <20120706055234.GC2237@intel.com> References: <4FF52C70.9010601@intel.com> <1341471717.1682.125.camel@rui.sh.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1341471717.1682.125.camel-fuY85erJQUO75v1z/vFq2g@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-i2c-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Zhang Rui Cc: Lan Tianyu , khali-PUYAD+kWke1g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org, ben-linux-elnMNo+KYs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org, w.sang-bIcnvbaLZ9MEGnE8C9+IrQ@public.gmane.org, lenb-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, linux-acpi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, jkosina-AlSwsSmVLrQ@public.gmane.org, chatty-rXV5z7KbLFk@public.gmane.org, jj_ding-9cfG7bMpBgR9nmWX13WWKA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 03:01:57PM +0800, Zhang Rui wrote: > +Note that although these are ACPI devices, we prefer to use PnP drivers > for them, > +this is because: > +1. all the non-ACPI-predefined Devices are exported as PnP devices as > well > +2. PnP bus is a well designed bus. Probing via PnP layer saves a lot of > work > + for the device driver, e.g. getting & parsing ACPI resources. (Nice BKM, thanks for sharing) I have few questions about using PnP drivers instead of pure ACPI drivers. ACPI 5.0 defined some new resources, for example "Fixed DMA descriptor" that has information about the request line + channel for the device to use. Hovewer, PnP drivers pass resources as 'struct resource', which basically only has start and end - how do you represent all this new stuff using 'struct resource'? Or should we use acpi_walk_resources() where 'struct resource' is not suitable?