From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jacob Pan Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] mfd/axp2xx: extend axp20x to support axp288 pmic Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 13:11:03 -0700 Message-ID: <20140910131103.4f0e06fc@ultegra> References: <1410267775-4683-1-git-send-email-jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com> <1410267775-4683-3-git-send-email-jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com> <20140910091354.GL30307@lee--X1> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20140910091354.GL30307@lee--X1> Sender: linux-iio-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Lee Jones Cc: IIO , LKML , DEVICE TREE , Carlo Caione , Srinivas Pandruvada , Aaron Lu , Alan Cox , Jean Delvare , Samuel Ortiz , Liam Girdwood , Mark Brown , Grant Likely , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Rob Herring , Lars-Peter Clausen , Hartmut Knaack , Fugang Duan , Arnd Bergmann , Zubair Lutfullah , Sebastian Reichel , Johannes Thumshirn , Philippe Reynes , Angelo Compagnucci List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 10 Sep 2014 10:13:54 +0100 Lee Jones wrote: > I think adding ACPI support should be in its own patch. Agree with the rest reviews comments. On this one, I agree I should take out the non-essential part of the ACPI code. i.e. mfd cell device for acpi opregion handler driver. Let it be part of opregion handler driver submission later on. However, the enumeration part of the ACPI code is essential to support this device since it is intended to be enumerated under ACPI only, a customized PMIC for Intel. Thanks, Jacob