Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] ACPI serdev support

[Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>]

Hi,

On 19-10-17 16:32, Marcel Holtmann wrote:
> Hi Hans,
> 
>>>>>>>>> Add ACPI support for serial attached devices.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Currently, serial devices are not set as enumerated during
>>>>>>>>> ACPI scan for SPI or i2c buses (but not for UART). This
>>>>>>>>> should also be done for UART serial devices.  I renamed
>>>>>>>>> *spi_i2c_slave* to *serial_bus_slave* to reflect this.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This needs Johan Hovold's "serdev: fix registration of
>>>>>>>>> second slave" patch.
>>>>>>>> In theory this series could go in through the acpi-tree
>>>>>>>> without my fix. It would only affect an error case where an
>>>>>>>> unlikely failure to register an ACPI serdev device, would
>>>>>>>> prevent the tty-class device from being registered instead of
>>>>>>>> the controller. That is, something we can live with until this
>>>>>>>> all converges in 4.15-rc1 if needed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That said, I think we should consider taking all serdev
>>>>>>>> changes, and therefore also the ACPI patch, through the tty
>>>>>>>> tree instead in order to avoid merge conflicts. Rafael?
>>>>>>> OK
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please feel free to add
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Acked-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> to the ACPI core change.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And I will assume that this series will go in via the tty tree.
>>>>>> you have to take these two patches now via the TTY tree now. In
>>>>>> case you already marked them as someone else problem ;)
>>>>> Is there any problem I missed with those patches?
>>>>> Do I have to re-send them?
>>>>
>>>> No, they are in my queue, still catching up...
>>> I just realised that we cannot merge this series (the second acpi patch)
>>> until the hci_intel driver gains serdev support or otherwise PM will
>>> break for those devices.
>>> Specifically, the hci_intel driver uses similar hacks as the hci_bcm
>>> driver does for PM, so we need something like Hans's hci_bcm series also
>>> for hci_intel before we can do the switch.
>>
>> Hmm, I've never actually seen any hardware use an intel BT HCI connected
>> to a serdev, but I guess people did not write that code for fun, so those
>> do exist ?
> 
> they are all ACPI based and could now start using serdev. Previously they were all driven by btattach.

I understand, I was just wondering if anyone is aware of any hardware
actually using Intel BT devices in this manner, because it is going
to be tricky to do a similar series if we cannot test it.

Regards,

Hans