From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hanjun Guo Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/7] acpi: Add early device probing infrastructure Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2015 22:41:18 +0800 Message-ID: <560AA30E.8030008@linaro.org> References: <1443451758-22717-1-git-send-email-marc.zyngier@arm.com> <1443451758-22717-2-git-send-email-marc.zyngier@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1443451758-22717-2-git-send-email-marc.zyngier@arm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Marc Zyngier , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Len Brown , Tomasz Nowicki , Thomas Gleixner , Jason Cooper , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Sudeep Holla , Will Deacon , Catalin Marinas , Daniel Lezcano Cc: linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On 09/28/2015 10:49 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote: > IRQ controllers and timers are the two types of device the kernel > requires before being able to use the device driver model. > > ACPI so far lacks a proper probing infrastructure similar to the one > we have with DT, where we're able to declare IRQ chips and > clocksources inside the driver code, and let the core code pick it up > and call us back on a match. This leads to all kind of really ugly > hacks all over the arm64 code and even in the ACPI layer. > > In order to allow some basic probing based on the ACPI tables, > introduce "struct acpi_probe_entry" which contains just enough > data and callbacks to match a table, an optional subtable, and > call a probe function. A driver can, at build time, register itself > and expect being called if the right entry exists in the ACPI > table. > > A acpi_probe_device_table() is provided, taking an identifier for > a set of acpi_prove_entries, and iterating over the registered > entries. > > Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier Reviewed-by: Hanjun Guo Thanks Hanjun