From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com (Rafael J. Wysocki)
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 22:51:54 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Convert smsc911x to use ACPI as well as DT
In-Reply-To: <1443033714.74600.18.camel@infradead.org>
References: <1439417187-21411-1-git-send-email-jeremy.linton@arm.com>
 <1439417187-21411-3-git-send-email-jeremy.linton@arm.com>
 <1443033714.74600.18.camel@infradead.org>
Message-ID: <560310EA.2070805@intel.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On 9/23/2015 8:41 PM, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-08-12 at 17:06 -0500, Jeremy Linton wrote:
>>   
>> +static const struct acpi_device_id smsc911x_acpi_match[] = {
>> +       { "ARMH9118", 0 },
>> +       { }
>> +};
>> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, smsc911x_acpi_match);
>> +
>>   static struct platform_driver smsc911x_driver = {
>>          .probe = smsc911x_drv_probe,
>>          .remove = smsc911x_drv_remove,
>> @@ -2661,6 +2656,7 @@ static struct platform_driver smsc911x_driver =
>> {
>>                  .name   = SMSC_CHIPNAME,
>>                  .pm     = SMSC911X_PM_OPS,
>>                  .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(smsc911x_dt_ids),
>> +               .acpi_match_table = ACPI_PTR(smsc911x_acpi_match),
>>          },
>>   };
> Hm, surely you shouldn't need this part? If the ACPI device has a HID
> of PRP0001, and an appropriate "compatible" property, then it ought to
> be loaded anyway. If that doesn't work, we should fix that.

But if the device ID is assigned already, why would it hurt to actually 
use it?

Thanks,
Rafael