Re: [PATCH v2 3/3 UPDATED] i2c / ACPI: add ACPI enumeration support

[Mika Westerberg]

On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 03:49:25PM -0700, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> I think the benefit here is that you can merely point
> .acpi_match_table at an acpi_device_id[] table, then use
> platform_get_resource() as a generic way to get resources, whether the
> platform device came from OF, ACPI, etc.  The alternative would be to
> add, e.g., a PNP driver with a .probe() method that uses
> pnp_get_resource().  That's not very much code, but it is more, even
> if the .probe() method just calls a device registration function
> that's shared across bus types.
> 
> That benefit seems like a great thing, and my question then is why
> wouldn't we just do it across the board and make platform devices for
> *all* ACPI devices without having the I2C and SPI special cases?

That wouldn't be any better than having a PNP or ACPI device. We must still
create the corresponding I2C or SPI device in order to have a driver that
can plug into I2C or SPI core.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/