From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Shevchenko Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] i2c: core: Move ACPI gpio IRQ handling into i2c_acpi_get_irq Date: Tue, 21 May 2019 20:27:26 +0300 Message-ID: <20190521172726.GO9224@smile.fi.intel.com> References: <20190521150502.27305-1-ckeepax@opensource.cirrus.com> <20190521150502.27305-5-ckeepax@opensource.cirrus.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190521150502.27305-5-ckeepax@opensource.cirrus.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Charles Keepax Cc: wsa@the-dreams.de, mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com, jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com, jbroadus@gmail.com, patches@opensource.cirrus.com List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 04:05:01PM +0100, Charles Keepax wrote: > It makes sense to contain all the ACPI IRQ handling in a single helper > function. > Note that this one is somewhat interesting, it seems the search > through the resource list is done against the companion device > of the adapter but the GPIO search is done against the companion > device of the client. It feels to me like these really should > be done on the same device, and certainly this is what SPI > does (both against the equivalent of the adapter). Perhaps > someone with more ACPI knowledge than myself could comment? It would be interesting to see the path how you come to this conclusion. > acpi_dev_free_resource_list(&resource_list); > > + if (*irq < 0) > + *irq = acpi_dev_gpio_irq_get(ACPI_COMPANION(&client->dev), 0); I think adev here is what we may use here. You may put assert here and see if it happens when you test your series. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko