Messages in this thread | | | From | Kai-Heng Feng <> | Date | Tue, 15 Feb 2022 19:30:10 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3] iio: accel: adxl345: Add ACPI HID table |
| |
On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 4:28 PM Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 6:20 AM Kai-Heng Feng > <kai.heng.feng@canonical.com> wrote: > > > > x86 boards may use ACPI HID "ADS0345" for adxl345 device. > > > > Analog replied: > > "ADS034X is not a valid PNP ID. ADS0345 would be. > > I'm not aware that this ID is already taken. > > Feel free to submit a mainline Linux input mailing list patch." > > > > So add an ACPI match table for that accordingly. > > Thank you for the update, my comments below. > > ... > > > @@ -41,6 +41,7 @@ static int adxl345_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *client, > > static const struct i2c_device_id adxl345_i2c_id[] = { > > { "adxl345", ADXL345 }, > > { "adxl375", ADXL375 }, > > > + { "ADS0345:00", ADXL345 }, > > { } > > }; > > > > This is wrong. First of all, on the left side you put the device > instance name (which must not be in the ID tables, since the device > instance name is "ID + instance number"). Second, the motivation of > this is not clear, if the device is enumerated by ACPI, why do you > care about board code?
I was uncertain on this at first, but later I saw some drivers use this form (*:00) too, so I just followed through.
The intention is to accommodate adxl345_i2c_probe() without any modification.
> > Just don't add anything to this table.
Got it.
> > The rest is good, but consider doing the same for _spi part of the driver.
OK, will do.
Kai-Heng
> > -- > With Best Regards, > Andy Shevchenko
| |