| Message ID | 20190620133420.4632-5-ckeepax@opensource.cirrus.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Not Applicable, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | I2C IRQ Probe Improvements | expand |
On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 02:34:17PM +0100, Charles Keepax wrote: > In preparation for more refactoring make i2c_acpi_get_irq available > outside i2c-core-acpi.c. > Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> > Reviewed-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com> I'm not sure Rb tags are suitable for patches 4 and 5 since the changes made. > +struct acpi_device; Hmm... Doesn't acpi.h define that for !ACPI case? > #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI > const struct acpi_device_id * > i2c_acpi_match_device(const struct acpi_device_id *matches, > struct i2c_client *client); > void i2c_acpi_register_devices(struct i2c_adapter *adap); > + > +int i2c_acpi_get_irq(struct acpi_device *adev); Since you call this afterwards with struct device from which companion is derived, can't we directly use struct device as a parameter? Yes, in case of adev call, it might be &adev->dev I suppose?
On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 05:59:50PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 02:34:17PM +0100, Charles Keepax wrote: > > In preparation for more refactoring make i2c_acpi_get_irq available > > outside i2c-core-acpi.c. > > > Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> > > Reviewed-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com> > > I'm not sure Rb tags are suitable for patches 4 and 5 since the changes made. > Apologies I figured the changes were small enough will remove for any changes in future. > > +struct acpi_device; > > Hmm... Doesn't acpi.h define that for !ACPI case? > Pretty sure I was getting a build error in that case. > > #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI > > const struct acpi_device_id * > > i2c_acpi_match_device(const struct acpi_device_id *matches, > > struct i2c_client *client); > > void i2c_acpi_register_devices(struct i2c_adapter *adap); > > + > > +int i2c_acpi_get_irq(struct acpi_device *adev); > > Since you call this afterwards with struct device from which companion is > derived, can't we directly use struct device as a parameter? > > Yes, in case of adev call, it might be &adev->dev I suppose? > A good idea I will investigate and do a respin taking in the other comments too. Thanks, Charles
diff --git a/drivers/i2c/i2c-core-acpi.c b/drivers/i2c/i2c-core-acpi.c index 7d4d66ba752d4..0ddfcca6091e1 100644 --- a/drivers/i2c/i2c-core-acpi.c +++ b/drivers/i2c/i2c-core-acpi.c @@ -144,7 +144,15 @@ static int i2c_acpi_add_resource(struct acpi_resource *ares, void *data) return 1; /* No need to add resource to the list */ } -static int i2c_acpi_get_irq(struct acpi_device *adev) +/** + * i2c_acpi_get_irq - get device IRQ number from ACPI + * @client: Pointer to the I2C client device + * + * Find the IRQ number used by a specific client device. + * + * Return: The IRQ number or an error code. + */ +int i2c_acpi_get_irq(struct acpi_device *adev) { struct list_head resource_list; int irq = -ENOENT; diff --git a/drivers/i2c/i2c-core.h b/drivers/i2c/i2c-core.h index 2a3b28bf826b1..4fbe0a0bcc4c4 100644 --- a/drivers/i2c/i2c-core.h +++ b/drivers/i2c/i2c-core.h @@ -58,11 +58,15 @@ static inline int __i2c_check_suspended(struct i2c_adapter *adap) return 0; } +struct acpi_device; + #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI const struct acpi_device_id * i2c_acpi_match_device(const struct acpi_device_id *matches, struct i2c_client *client); void i2c_acpi_register_devices(struct i2c_adapter *adap); + +int i2c_acpi_get_irq(struct acpi_device *adev); #else /* CONFIG_ACPI */ static inline void i2c_acpi_register_devices(struct i2c_adapter *adap) { } static inline const struct acpi_device_id * @@ -71,6 +75,11 @@ i2c_acpi_match_device(const struct acpi_device_id *matches, { return NULL; } + +static inline int i2c_acpi_get_irq(struct acpi_device *adev) +{ + return 0; +} #endif /* CONFIG_ACPI */ extern struct notifier_block i2c_acpi_notifier;