From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Garrett Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 2/2] ACPI/platform: Add ACPI ID for Intel MBI device Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 02:21:30 +0000 Message-ID: <20131204022130.GA26084@srcf.ucam.org> References: <1385100357-5459-1-git-send-email-david.e.box@linux.intel.com> <1386115178-7559-1-git-send-email-david.e.box@linux.intel.com> <1386115178-7559-3-git-send-email-david.e.box@linux.intel.com> <20131204013001.GA25037@srcf.ucam.org> <20131204021703.GA8282@linux.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20131204021703.GA8282@linux.intel.com> Sender: platform-driver-x86-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "David E. Box" Cc: rjw@rjwysocki.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 06:17:03PM -0800, David E. Box wrote: > This is per the requirement in Documentation/acpi/enumeration.txt: > > "Currently the kernel is not able to automatically determine from which ACPI > device it should make the corresponding platform device so we need to add > the ACPI device explicitly to acpi_platform_device_ids list defined in > drivers/acpi/acpi_platform.c" Well sure, but why do you need to be a platform device at all? This functionality was intended for cases where we already have a driver for the part that enumerated it via some other mechanism. If the driver's only intended for ACPI systems then why not just be an ACPI device? -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org