Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 29 Sep 2015 11:26:53 -0600 | From | Jason Gunthorpe <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/2] tpm, tpm_tis: use acpi_driver instead of pnp_driver |
| |
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 08:07:10PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> -static struct pnp_device_id tpm_pnp_tbl[] = { > +static struct acpi_device_id tpm_acpi_tbl[] = { > {"PNP0C31", 0}, /* TPM */ > {"ATM1200", 0}, /* Atmel */ > {"IFX0102", 0}, /* Infineon */ > @@ -925,28 +941,34 @@ static struct pnp_device_id tpm_pnp_tbl[] = { > {"", 0}, /* User Specified */ > {"", 0} /* Terminator */ > };
Is this OK? I don't know alot about x86 PNP, but I thought the pnp_device_id scheme would work with ACPI and legacy PNPBIOS stuff, and changing to ACPI means ACPI only?
If so, should we care? Is there a spec for non-ACPI TPM discovery we need to be following here?
> struct tpm_chip *chip; > -#ifdef CONFIG_PNP > +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
Can you look at the various ifdefs and see if they can be something like:
> if (!force) { > - pnp_unregister_driver(&tis_pnp_driver); > + acpi_bus_unregister_driver(&tis_acpi_driver);
if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ACPI)) acpi_bus_unregister_driver(&tis_acpi_driver);
I think alot of the core driver stuff supports that now?
Jason
| |