From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mika Westerberg Subject: Re: [PATCH] I2C: Make I2C core able to be module when I2C_ACPI is selected. Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 10:07:59 +0300 Message-ID: <20140813070759.GB1657@lahna.fi.intel.com> References: <1407740455-21269-1-git-send-email-tianyu.lan@intel.com> <20140812095321.GU1657@lahna.fi.intel.com> <20140813020250.GA2853@katana> <53EAD278.2010003@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <53EAD278.2010003-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-i2c-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Lan Tianyu Cc: Wolfram Sang , torvalds-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org, linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 10:50:32AM +0800, Lan Tianyu wrote: > On 2014=E5=B9=B408=E6=9C=8813=E6=97=A5 10:03, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 12:53:21PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote: > >> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 03:00:55PM +0800, Lan Tianyu wrote: > >>> Commit da3c6647(I2C/ACPI: Clean up I2C ACPI code and Add CONFIG_I= 2C_ACPI > >>> config) adds a new kernel config I2C_ACPI and make I2C core built= in > >>> when the config is selected. This is wrong because distributions > >>> etc generally compile I2C as a module and the commit broken that. > >>> This patch is to make I2C core able to be a module when I2C_ACPI = is > >>> selected. Original issue the commit da3c6647 tried to avoid will > >>> be fixed in ACPICA and it's rarely triggered during unloading mod= ule.=20 > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Lan Tianyu > >> > >> I wonder if we can do > >> > >> depends on I2C=3Dy > >> > >> here? If I understand it right, then we only build the ACPI_I2C if= I2C > >> is compiled into the kernel. That way the problem da3c6647 tried t= o > >> solve doens't re-appear. > >> > >> We can later on relax this once ACPICA has been fixed. Thoughts? > >=20 > > I had the same idea yet my travel to Chicago interrupted thinking a= bout > > it further. Once I get rid of my jetlag, I'll have a closer look. U= nless > > you already came up with the perfect solution until then, of course= ;) > > >=20 > Hi Mika & Wolfram: > I have one concern about "depends on I2C=3Dy". If distribution confi= g > file selects I2C core as a module, the original code can enumerate I2= C > slave devices from ACPI table. But now I2C_ACPI depends on I2C core > built in, the I2C module can't enumerate devices from ACPI table. Thi= s > maybe a regression for distribution? True, but only the I2C OpRegion parts needs to have I2C=3Dy. Does it ma= ke sense to name ACPI_I2C to ACPI_I2C_OPREGION (or something like that) and only enable it when I2C=3Dy? Then we would have ACPI I2C enumeratio= n still in place.