Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 4/4] perf: arm_spe: Enable ACPI/Platform automatic module loading | From | Jeremy Linton <> | Date | Thu, 4 Apr 2019 12:24:38 -0500 |
| |
Hi,
On 4/4/19 12:04 PM, Will Deacon wrote: > On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 05:39:38PM -0500, Jeremy Linton wrote: >> Lets add the MODULE_TABLE and platform id_table entries so that >> the SPE driver can attach to the ACPI platform device created by >> the core pmu code. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com> >> Reviewed-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> >> --- >> drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c | 11 +++++++++-- >> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c b/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c >> index 7cb766dafe85..ffa2c76c08bb 100644 >> --- a/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c >> +++ b/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c >> @@ -1176,7 +1176,13 @@ static const struct of_device_id arm_spe_pmu_of_match[] = { >> }; >> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, arm_spe_pmu_of_match); >> >> -static int arm_spe_pmu_device_dt_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> +static const struct platform_device_id arm_spe_match[] = { >> + { "arm,spe-v1", 0}, > > It would be nice if we could avoid duplicating this string from the ACPI > parsing code.
Ok sure, I just need to find a good common place for it.
> >> + { } >> +}; >> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(platform, arm_spe_match); >> + >> +static int arm_spe_pmu_device_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> { >> int ret; >> struct arm_spe_pmu *spe_pmu; >> @@ -1236,11 +1242,12 @@ static int arm_spe_pmu_device_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) >> } >> >> static struct platform_driver arm_spe_pmu_driver = { >> + .id_table = arm_spe_match, >> .driver = { >> .name = DRVNAME, >> .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(arm_spe_pmu_of_match), > > Hmm, so some other drivers don't hook .id_table like you do, but instead > hook .acpi_match_table in the driver structure. Is that not better?
This isn't actually an ACPI device, (aka not defined in the namespace), so its missing much of the ACPI functionality. I think that also means its needs to be declared this way.
> > Will >
| |