From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mika Westerberg Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: Fix modalias for ACPI enumerated I2C devices Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 11:13:17 +0300 Message-ID: <20131014081317.GC3521@intel.com> References: <1381414669-26115-1-git-send-email-jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com> <20131011144946.GS3521@intel.com> <2393462.4JRAMNeigd@vostro.rjw.lan> <20131012050413.GY3521@intel.com> <525B907F.1020203@linux.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:63047 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751405Ab3JNIHu (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Oct 2013 04:07:50 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <525B907F.1020203@linux.intel.com> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Jarkko Nikula Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Wolfram Sang On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 09:34:39AM +0300, Jarkko Nikula wrote: > On 10/12/2013 08:04 AM, Mika Westerberg wrote: > >On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 12:16:02AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >>>I think that this is intentional. We don't want that the i2c modalias > >>>matches with the ACPI device (like with the i2c:INTABCD). Instead use ACPI > >>>IDs that are added to the driver to match with the ACPI device. > >>Well, I'm not really sure this was intentional, but I wonder how other bus > >>types work in that respect? > >We have the same for platform bus, if that's what you are asking. > > > Do we? I don't recall seeing per device modaliases on other > platforms on their platform buses. I mean for platform devices enumerated from ACPI. > And actually I don't see that happening in drivers/base/platform.c: > platform_uevent() either where just pdev->name is used but not > pdev->id (which is used with pdev->name for dev_set_name()). > > This makes me thinking that perhaps "pdevinfo.name = > dev_name(&adev->dev);" in drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c: > acpi_create_platform_device() should be fixed too as now modalias > for ACPI registered platform devices differ from platform devices > that are registered in other subsystems (e.g. regulatory, pcspkr, > alarmtimer, etc devices)? Well, if you think that it doesn't hit us back later if we get a match that isn't supposed to happen.