From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ken Xue Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] acpi:apd: Add APM X-Gene ACPI I2C device support Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 15:19:10 +0800 Message-ID: <1449731950.4557.24.camel@kxue-X58A-UD3R> References: <1449533774-22672-1-git-send-email-lho@apm.com> <1449533774-22672-2-git-send-email-lho@apm.com> <1449542948.2175.41.camel@kxue-X58A-UD3R> <1449728072.4557.22.camel@kxue-X58A-UD3R> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Loc Ho Cc: wsa@the-dreams.de, rjw@rjwysocki.net, mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com, Len Brown , linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Jon Masters , "patches@apm.com" , Annie.Wang@amd.com List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2015-12-09 at 22:57 -0800, Loc Ho wrote: > >> Sure you want this? > > Yes. Even though it may look like too much macros for just several > > devices now. But I think AMD and other ARM socs may also try to leverage > > APD for more and more ACPI devices. > > It is a good direction that 1)improve efficiency of matching ACPI > > handler 2) split devices and potential hook routines into different > > classes clearly > > > > It also will be more convenient to move ARM devices out of APD if there > > is a new design for ARM ACPI device. > > > > Okay... I will generate v2 when ready. One more question, does AMD > ARM64 SoC need it later? > Thanks. I am not sure about driver design for AMD ARM64 SoC.