lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Sep]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [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


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2015-09-29 19:41    [W:5.368 / U:2.760 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site