From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] ACPI / utils: Introduce acpi_dev_get_first_match_name() Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2018 01:18:17 +0100 Message-ID: <3404188.B388fAZkns@aspire.rjw.lan> References: <20180105160935.48588-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> <1515416960.7000.784.camel@linux.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Return-path: Received: from cloudserver094114.home.pl ([79.96.170.134]:64788 "EHLO cloudserver094114.home.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751656AbeAIAT3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Jan 2018 19:19:29 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1515416960.7000.784.camel@linux.intel.com> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Andy Shevchenko , Linus Walleij Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Erik Schmauss , ACPI Devel Maling List , Pierre-Louis Bossart , Liam Girdwood , Mark Brown , "moderated list:SOUND - SOC LAYER / DYNAMIC AUDIO POWER MANAGEM..." , linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, Mika Westerberg On Monday, January 8, 2018 2:09:20 PM CET Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Sat, 2018-01-06 at 00:27 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 5:09 PM, Andy Shevchenko > > wrote: > > > Sometimes the user wants to have device name of the match rather > > > than > > > just checking if device present or not. To make life easier for such > > > users introduce acpi_dev_get_first_match_name() helper based on code > > > for acpi_dev_present(). > > > > > > For example, GPIO driver for Intel Merrifield needs to know the > > > device > > > name of pin control to be able to apply GPIO mapping table to the > > > proper > > > device. > > > > > > To be more consistent with the purpose rename > > > > > > struct acpi_dev_present_info -> struct acpi_dev_match_info > > > acpi_dev_present_cb() -> acpi_dev_match_cb() > > > > > > in the utils.c file. > > > > > > Tested-by: Pierre-Louis Bossart > > m> > > > Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko > > > > OK, so which way do you want this to go in? > > If you have no objections, patch 1 may go straight forward to linux-pm > tree as far as you are okay with the contents. > > I dunno, if Mika's ACK is enough to you to get the second one (patch 2) > together, otherwise Linus' ACK would be needed or leave it for next > cycle. > > According to what Mark and Pierre told previously I guess we just > postpone patch 3 for next cycle. OK Linus, can you please have a look at the [2/3] from this lot and let me know whether or not I can take it? Thanks, Rafael