| Message ID | 2747891.0orCNBJG8v@vostro.rjw.lan (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Mon, Apr 01, 2013 at 02:21:08AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> > > The ACPI handle of struct spi_master's dev member should not be > set, because this causes that struct spi_master to be associated > with the ACPI device node corresponding to its parent as the > second "physical_device", which is incorrect (this happens during > the registration of struct spi_master). Consequently, > acpi_register_spi_devices() should use the ACPI handle of the > parent of the struct spi_master it is called for rather than that > struct spi_master's ACPI handle (which should be NULL). > > Make that happen and modify the spi-pxa2xx driver, which currently is > the only driver for ACPI-enumerated SPI controller chips, not to set > the ACPI handle for the struct spi_master it creates. > > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> Acked-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Mon, Apr 01, 2013 at 02:21:08AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> > > The ACPI handle of struct spi_master's dev member should not be > set, because this causes that struct spi_master to be associated > with the ACPI device node corresponding to its parent as the > second "physical_device", which is incorrect (this happens during > the registration of struct spi_master). Consequently, > acpi_register_spi_devices() should use the ACPI handle of the > parent of the struct spi_master it is called for rather than that > struct spi_master's ACPI handle (which should be NULL). Acked-by: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> or does this need to be applied to the SPI tree?
On Mon, Apr 01, 2013 at 03:30:05PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> I can push it through the PM/ACPI tree along with an analogous I2C patch.
Great, thanks - I couldn't remember if the dependencies were in the SPI
tree or not.
On Monday, April 01, 2013 12:44:23 PM Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Apr 01, 2013 at 02:21:08AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> > > > > The ACPI handle of struct spi_master's dev member should not be > > set, because this causes that struct spi_master to be associated > > with the ACPI device node corresponding to its parent as the > > second "physical_device", which is incorrect (this happens during > > the registration of struct spi_master). Consequently, > > acpi_register_spi_devices() should use the ACPI handle of the > > parent of the struct spi_master it is called for rather than that > > struct spi_master's ACPI handle (which should be NULL). > > Acked-by: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> > > or does this need to be applied to the SPI tree? I can push it through the PM/ACPI tree along with an analogous I2C patch. Thanks, Rafael
Index: linux-pm/drivers/spi/spi.c =================================================================== --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/spi/spi.c +++ linux-pm/drivers/spi/spi.c @@ -984,7 +984,7 @@ static void acpi_register_spi_devices(st acpi_status status; acpi_handle handle; - handle = ACPI_HANDLE(&master->dev); + handle = ACPI_HANDLE(master->dev.parent); if (!handle) return; Index: linux-pm/drivers/spi/spi-pxa2xx.c =================================================================== --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/spi/spi-pxa2xx.c +++ linux-pm/drivers/spi/spi-pxa2xx.c @@ -1168,7 +1168,6 @@ static int pxa2xx_spi_probe(struct platf master->dev.parent = &pdev->dev; master->dev.of_node = pdev->dev.of_node; - ACPI_HANDLE_SET(&master->dev, ACPI_HANDLE(&pdev->dev)); /* the spi->mode bits understood by this driver: */ master->mode_bits = SPI_CPOL | SPI_CPHA | SPI_CS_HIGH | SPI_LOOP;