From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hans de Goede Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Input: silead - Add OF device ID table Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 15:23:22 +0100 Message-ID: <559a8956-0594-23e1-2437-8b595042cdaa@redhat.com> References: <20170221181254.14748-1-javier@osg.samsung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: platform-driver-x86-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Javier Martinez Canillas , 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 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. Regards, Hans