Re: [PATCH v2] iio: accel: bmc150: Check for a second ACPI device for BOSC0200

From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@jic23.retrosnub.co.uk>
Cc: Jeremy Cline <jeremy@jcline.org>,
	Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@gmx.de>,
	Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
	Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@pmeerw.net>,
	Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>,
	Lars Kellogg-Stedman <lars@oddbit.com>,
	Steven Presser <steve@pressers.name>,
	Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>,
	Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>,
	linux-iio@vger.kernel.org,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] iio: accel: bmc150: Check for a second ACPI device for BOSC0200
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2018 16:07:02 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHp75VenBEYSZ9okZfGZUmBX+ikL236a9_qjtn-DJtSihw5X+g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180128094021.572ab366@archlinux>

On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 11:40 AM, Jonathan Cameron
<jic23@jic23.retrosnub.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Jan 2018 10:43:30 +0000
> Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, 9 Jan 2018 21:24:01 +0000
>> Jeremy Cline <jeremy@jcline.org> wrote:
>> > On 12/10/2017 12:21 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>> > > On Wed, 6 Dec 2017 17:52:34 +0000
>> > > Jeremy Cline <jeremy@jcline.org> wrote:

>> > >> Some BOSC0200 acpi_device-s describe two accelerometers in a single ACPI
>> > >> device. Check for a companion device and handle a second i2c_client
>> > >> if it is present.

>> > I didn't see this land anywhere (I was looking in
>> > git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jic23/iio.git, maybe that's not
>> > the right place?) and I just wanted to make sure this didn't get lost in
>> > the holiday shuffle.
>> It did indeed get lost - thanks for the reminder.  Now applied to the
>> togreg branch of iio.git.  However, unfortunately we may be too near
>> to the merge window opening for it to make it.  Depends on what Linus
>> says later today when rc8 comes out.
>
> I've added some #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI defenses against the case
> of no ACPI support being compiled in.  Alternative would be to add
> stubs for those functions that don't have them...
>
> probably just acpi_device_hid.
>
> But that would take much longer.  Feel free to propose it and a patch
> removing the ifdef fun if you like!

Where can I see the patch?

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko