From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (lindbergh.monkeyblade.net [23.128.96.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 521E11775B for ; Fri, 27 Oct 2023 10:12:04 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="MNdJXDUs" Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.55.52.115]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F2003BD; Fri, 27 Oct 2023 03:12:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1698401523; x=1729937523; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=fC4NawWJxctEmEJLsZMy6ys4v8xn8O7rZqwzS7NeHnk=; b=MNdJXDUspd8LsbbaVo0dVUGTwGRigo3RHGf4Eug/R1fdA6FyzKbbniN8 KXJPjoaS6WM5qahdk8gwAaVtuhtFGccH7nODYhhbnqjLUjRiiXRkjlzn6 JO1DL2Vu24J7GpNTn7cRrh01QWRimhcuJZbru8i3Ivnn/UMJ36VUUQ8Kr vxpEyjRhyHqEvflcsZXCuIxDqAKTmB4ZjmeQunmP2daBwue4cOm7sq+Zd uRWMTWar+7D0EnDyPkWn3yJcXkXu8kQsggDvIZhzuTgWfs7DO7QsP7isx 6rnXcazj33EPIbboSkP6KtOvCrNHXjdi8oH3BGDq1Bkl6RhKpWekxzsvk Q==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10875"; a="387562322" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.03,255,1694761200"; d="scan'208";a="387562322" Received: from orsmga008.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.65]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 27 Oct 2023 03:12:02 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10875"; a="788789658" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.03,255,1694761200"; d="scan'208";a="788789658" Received: from black.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.28]) by orsmga008.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 27 Oct 2023 03:11:59 -0700 Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2023 13:11:56 +0300 From: Raag Jadav To: Mika Westerberg Cc: rafael@kernel.org, len.brown@intel.com, andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mallikarjunappa.sangannavar@intel.com, bala.senthil@intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ACPI: LPSS: use acpi_dev_uid_match() for matching _UID Message-ID: References: <20231026083335.12551-1-raag.jadav@intel.com> <20231027081855.GK3208943@black.fi.intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20231027081855.GK3208943@black.fi.intel.com> On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 11:18:55AM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote: > On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 02:03:35PM +0530, Raag Jadav wrote: > > Now that we have a standard ACPI helper, we can use acpi_dev_uid_match() > > for matching _UID as per the original logic before commit 2a036e489eb1 > > ("ACPI: LPSS: Refactor _UID handling to use acpi_dev_uid_to_integer()"), > > instead of treating it as an integer. > > > > Signed-off-by: Raag Jadav > > Acked-by: Mika Westerberg > > The change still looks good to me, however I wonder if we could maybe > improve acpi_dev_uid_match() to support both data types possible for > _UID? This of course is separate patch (unless there are objections). > > There is the _Generic() thing and I think that can be used to make > > acpi_dev_uid_match() > > which takes either u64 (or maybe even unsigned int) or const char * and > based on that picks the correct implementation. Not sure if that's > possible, did not check but it would allow us to use one function > everywhere instead of acpi_dev_uid_to_integer() and > acpi_dev_uid_match(). The way I see it, acpi_dev_uid_to_integer() is useful when drivers want to parse _UID and store it in their private data, so that it is available for making various decisions throughout the lifetime of the driver, as opposed to acpi_dev_uid_match() which is more useful for oneshot comparisons in my opinion. So I'm a bit conflicted about merging them into a single helper, unless ofcourse there is a way to serve both purposes. However, I do agree that we can improve acpi_dev_uid_match() by treating uids as integers underneath, instead of doing a raw string comparison. This would make it more aligned with the spec as suggested by Andy. Raag