Thread (36 messages) flat view 36 messages, 14 authors, 2015-11-02
STALE3974d

Revision v1 of 12 in this series.

Revisions (12)
  1. v1 [diff vs current]
  2. v1 [diff vs current]
  3. v1 [diff vs current]
  4. v1 [diff vs current]
  5. v1 [diff vs current]
  6. v1 [diff vs current]
  7. v1 [diff vs current]
  8. v1 [diff vs current]
  9. v1 [diff vs current]
  10. v1 current
  11. v1 [diff vs current]
  12. v1 [diff vs current]

[PATCH 2/2] Convert smsc911x to use ACPI as well as DT

From: Rafael J. Wysocki <hidden>
Date: 2015-09-23 20:51:54
Also in: netdev

On 9/23/2015 8:41 PM, David Woodhouse wrote:
On Wed, 2015-08-12 at 17:06 -0500, Jeremy Linton wrote:
quoted
  
+static const struct acpi_device_id smsc911x_acpi_match[] = {
+       { "ARMH9118", 0 },
+       { }
+};
+MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, smsc911x_acpi_match);
+
  static struct platform_driver smsc911x_driver = {
         .probe = smsc911x_drv_probe,
         .remove = smsc911x_drv_remove,
@@ -2661,6 +2656,7 @@ static struct platform_driver smsc911x_driver =
{
                 .name   = SMSC_CHIPNAME,
                 .pm     = SMSC911X_PM_OPS,
                 .of_match_table = of_match_ptr(smsc911x_dt_ids),
+               .acpi_match_table = ACPI_PTR(smsc911x_acpi_match),
         },
  };
Hm, surely you shouldn't need this part? If the ACPI device has a HID
of PRP0001, and an appropriate "compatible" property, then it ought to
be loaded anyway. If that doesn't work, we should fix that.
But if the device ID is assigned already, why would it hurt to actually 
use it?

Thanks,
Rafael
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help