From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932104AbaKKLuk (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Nov 2014 06:50:40 -0500 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:10478 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932074AbaKKLuh (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Nov 2014 06:50:37 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,862,1389772800"; d="scan'208";a="414773251" Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 13:50:28 +0200 From: Mika Westerberg To: "David E. Box" Cc: wsa@the-dreams.de, jdelvare@suse.de, arnd@arndb.de, maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com, dianders@chromium.org, u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de, laurent.pinchart+renesas@ideasonboard.com, boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com, maxime.coquelin@st.com, andrew@lunn.ch, sjg@chromium.org, markus.mayer@linaro.org, ch.naveen@samsung.com, jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com, max.schwarz@online.de, skuribay@pobox.com, Romain.Baeriswyl@abilis.com, wenkai.du@intel.com, chiau.ee.chew@intel.com, christian.ruppert@abilis.com, alan@linux.intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] i2c-designware: Add Intel Baytrail PMIC I2C bus support Message-ID: <20141111115028.GH1454@lahna.fi.intel.com> References: <1410543367-6565-1-git-send-email-david.e.box@linux.intel.com> <1411497626-7984-1-git-send-email-david.e.box@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1411497626-7984-1-git-send-email-david.e.box@linux.intel.com> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 11:40:26AM -0700, David E. Box wrote: > +void baytrail_evaluate_sem(struct dw_i2c_dev *dev) > +{ > + acpi_status status; > + unsigned long long shared_host = 0; > + acpi_handle handle; > + > + if (!dev || !dev->dev) { > + pr_err("%s:%d: device is NULL\n", __func__, __LINE__); Not sure if it is useful to print things like above. > + return; > + } > + > + handle = ACPI_HANDLE(dev->dev); > + if (!handle) > + return; > + > + status = acpi_evaluate_integer(handle, "_SEM", NULL, &shared_host); Maybe it is better to check first if the operation succeeded before touching shared_host? if (ACPI_SUCCESS(status) && shared_host) { } Otherwise ACPI parts look good to me. > + > + if (shared_host) { > + dev_info(dev->dev, "I2C bus managed by PUNIT\n"); > + dev->has_hw_lock = true; > + dev->pm_runtime_disabled = true; > + } > +} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(baytrail_evaluate_sem);