From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Javier Martinez Canillas Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Input: silead - Add OF device ID table Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 11:25:54 -0300 Message-ID: <1b07bb93-29c4-c735-d07a-0da05ddc2292@osg.samsung.com> References: <20170221181254.14748-1-javier@osg.samsung.com> <559a8956-0594-23e1-2437-8b595042cdaa@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <559a8956-0594-23e1-2437-8b595042cdaa@redhat.com> Sender: platform-driver-x86-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Hans de Goede , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, Dmitry Torokhov , linux-input@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org Hello Hans, On 02/22/2017 11:23 AM, Hans de Goede wrote: > HI, > > On 22-02-17 13:45, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: >> Hello Hans, >> >> Thanks for your feedback. >> >> On 02/22/2017 05:29 AM, Hans de Goede wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> On 21-02-17 19:12, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: >>>> The driver doesn't have a struct of_device_id table but supported devices >>>> are registered via Device Trees. This is working on the assumption that a >>>> I2C device registered via OF will always match a legacy I2C device ID and >>>> that the MODALIAS reported will always be of the form i2c:. >>>> >>>> But this could change in the future so the correct approach is to have an >>>> OF device ID table if the devices are registered via OF. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Javier Martinez Canillas >>>> --- >>>> >>>> drivers/input/touchscreen/silead.c | 14 ++++++++++++++ >>>> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/input/touchscreen/silead.c b/drivers/input/touchscreen/silead.c >>>> index 404830a4a366..aae3ba1c3e02 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/input/touchscreen/silead.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/input/touchscreen/silead.c >>>> @@ -580,12 +580,26 @@ static const struct acpi_device_id silead_ts_acpi_match[] = { >>>> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, silead_ts_acpi_match); >>>> #endif >>>> >>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_OF >>>> +static const struct of_device_id silead_ts_of_match[] = { >>>> + { .compatible = "silead,gsl1680" }, >>>> + { .compatible = "silead,gsl1688" }, >>>> + { .compatible = "silead,gsl3670" }, >>>> + { .compatible = "silead,gsl3675" }, >>>> + { .compatible = "silead,gsl3692" }, >>>> + { .compatible = "silead,mssl1680" }, >>>> + { }, >>>> +}; >>> >>> Please drop the mssl1680 compatible, that id an ACPI ugliness >> >> Ok, I'll drop that compatible if isn't needed for Device Tree. >> >>> which we don't need for devicetree. >>> >> >> I'm not sure I understood your ACPI comment, > > There is no silead chip named mssl1680, the mssl stands > for microsoft silead (or so I believe) and it is used > to identify the gsl1680 in some ACPI tables. > Ah, thanks a lot for the clarification. I'll re-spin the patch removing this entry then and adding your explanation in the commit message. > Regards, > > Hans Best regards, -- Javier Martinez Canillas Open Source Group Samsung Research America