From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Shevchenko Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] ACPI / scan: Create platform device for fwnodes with multiple i2c devices Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2018 14:49:30 +0300 Message-ID: <43d45add4c8059d44a0b228e4beffb03c094a512.camel@linux.intel.com> References: <20180807080539.17811-1-hdegoede@redhat.com> <20180807080539.17811-3-hdegoede@redhat.com> <00e16cb09c171b536449b61124473291f2b30d0b.camel@linux.intel.com> <13770931-2322-96a3-1667-83c96b25bcfb@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <13770931-2322-96a3-1667-83c96b25bcfb@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Hans de Goede , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Len Brown , Mika Westerberg , Darren Hart , Wolfram Sang Cc: Srinivas Pandruvada , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Heikki Krogerus , John Garry , linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2018-08-07 at 13:29 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi, > > On 07-08-18 13:19, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Tue, 2018-08-07 at 10:05 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > > > + /* > > > + * These devices have multiple I2cSerialBus resources and an > > > i2c-client > > > + * must be instantiated for each, each with its own > > > i2c_device_id. > > > + * Normally we only instantiate an i2c-client for the first > > > resource, > > > + * using the ACPI HID as id. These special cases are handled by > > > the > > > + * drivers/platform/x86/i2c-multi-instantiate.c driver, which > > > knows > > > + * which i2c_device_id to use for each resource. > > > + */ > > > + static const struct acpi_device_id i2c_multi_instantiate_ids[] = > > > { > > > + {"BSG1160", 0}, > > > + {"", 0}, > > > + }; > > > > Style nits: > > - can we move it outside of function? > > Sure, but there are 2 existing users of an array of acpi_device_id-s > combined with an acpi_match_device_ids() call and both have the array > inside the function, so for consistency it seems better to keep it > where it is. Hmm... OK. > > - is this existing style in the file and / or files in this folder > > for > > IDs? (I mean unnecessary 0:s and empty string? > > It seems that all variants one can come up with are already used > inside > this single file. Ah, that's sad. > I agree that less is more, so I will change this to: > > static const struct acpi_device_id > i2c_multi_instantiate_ids[] = { > {"BSG1160", }, > {} > }; In case if it mimics already existing style, looks quite good to me (otherwise perhaps comma inside {} can also be removed). > > For v4. Does it make sense to test v3 on your opinion? Or better to wait for v4? -- Andy Shevchenko Intel Finland Oy