lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Sep]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] tpm, tpm_tis: use acpi_driver instead of pnp_driver
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 08:07:10PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:

> -static struct pnp_device_id tpm_pnp_tbl[] = {
> +static struct acpi_device_id tpm_acpi_tbl[] = {
> {"PNP0C31", 0}, /* TPM */
> {"ATM1200", 0}, /* Atmel */
> {"IFX0102", 0}, /* Infineon */
> @@ -925,28 +941,34 @@ static struct pnp_device_id tpm_pnp_tbl[] = {
> {"", 0}, /* User Specified */
> {"", 0} /* Terminator */
> };

Is this OK? I don't know alot about x86 PNP, but I thought the
pnp_device_id scheme would work with ACPI and legacy PNPBIOS stuff,
and changing to ACPI means ACPI only?

If so, should we care? Is there a spec for non-ACPI TPM discovery we
need to be following here?

> struct tpm_chip *chip;
> -#ifdef CONFIG_PNP
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI

Can you look at the various ifdefs and see if they can be something
like:

> if (!force) {
> - pnp_unregister_driver(&tis_pnp_driver);
> + acpi_bus_unregister_driver(&tis_acpi_driver);

if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ACPI))
acpi_bus_unregister_driver(&tis_acpi_driver);

I think alot of the core driver stuff supports that now?

Jason


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-09-29 19:41    [W:0.036 / U:0.452 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site