From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05CB3C433ED for ; Thu, 6 May 2021 14:27:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C751A61176 for ; Thu, 6 May 2021 14:27:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234838AbhEFO2p (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 May 2021 10:28:45 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:46954 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234002AbhEFO2o (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 May 2021 10:28:44 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-x631.google.com (mail-pl1-x631.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::631]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 41143C061574; Thu, 6 May 2021 07:27:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x631.google.com with SMTP id p17so3465409plf.12; Thu, 06 May 2021 07:27:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=RJg7kjOyxMe1+24UWPr9CSoiWVwTJKzcOx8ur7RnyaI=; b=BasLSkjJ7myyUVG44THg+QLwWfACeiC61rkNjd0FPoz/Sb6Ik3wg5/desJWVdiRz2e I4fRp0PrFGzdXcSN52d5yp8NpPC4dUePQ2nhLr5kMKbC8WOowqI3XS/EIBVQ2iu3qNtz J/u5I28frojtCNMJoaRLYsFi+UnOKscG2P0wpjuY1N1WmGaiJ0iYEcnCEoYMbEBWHWax 5gZcaZB9W/qDeIlyow1P8BOc1xqbKsOSWDW/5TmTO+s01+bYDgYHeUis0PCa6oFW4SGe zsuU3PqYKjRiZWkHD4zDmtaIiKNVodoPxkaUVxxsqFPzwaDLXNlwRXMpYbQfDTdoucxt hDAg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=RJg7kjOyxMe1+24UWPr9CSoiWVwTJKzcOx8ur7RnyaI=; b=ZQPA4DKOYBgh52zE/abrwopsfXUDmWag+829Qn7YV/8hHHwuOc04IZGidVSQeNxLZL 23u94PitcQKIdr3J+053rAhvAvHt7WJ3MTDqfSNYUMxPDWkCai289IMKq1v4pEksUrd2 uamQ4WjQnXFyA9782HVGIVwjvMaGSZtLXPeCI47Fj5fxJwGkyi9u7U9WjpRK3Vud/K95 rPOc6WI3SswG3eH/LnO+nDi1Pw7EgAb/A+xChN2vhJIeh+VKYKEh0o+ku57236o2WQcE yuq7HXFQ9d+mHmdljaxStEaVWS7jUBYu8Nelg0SbVbrOTaIvkjTUQT6BTEumd+a7j5E0 0ySw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530WwstjLs5ch1LCq1+vYRwdwrhKNI5TZH+iIdb+5jqNZaay1BZz C4caPraSLpXbY1rkDzJ58U9kc3nxb4NsLTtSbaE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyzNWWgU1trDwKAa5gNve1qXCtfuyeKQ0wA0Jn9VaTERCZmZySDj9wOhAdAephM2A5iPg8vpkVoq+QpFJeW0Ng= X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:ecc6:b029:ee:af8f:899e with SMTP id a6-20020a170902ecc6b02900eeaf8f899emr5021970plh.21.1620311265815; Thu, 06 May 2021 07:27:45 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210506034332.752263-1-linux@roeck-us.net> <20210506133754.GA2266661@roeck-us.net> In-Reply-To: <20210506133754.GA2266661@roeck-us.net> From: Andy Shevchenko Date: Thu, 6 May 2021 17:27:29 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] iio: bme680_i2c: Remove ACPI support To: Guenter Roeck Cc: Jonathan Cameron , linux-iio , Linux Kernel Mailing List , kernel test robot , Hans de Goede Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 4:37 PM Guenter Roeck wrote: > On Thu, May 06, 2021 at 12:28:40PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Thu, May 6, 2021 at 6:43 AM Guenter Roeck wrote: > > > > > > With CONFIG_ACPI=n and -Werror, 0-day reports: > > > > > > drivers/iio/chemical/bme680_i2c.c:46:36: error: > > > 'bme680_acpi_match' defined but not used > > > > > > Apparently BME0680 is not a valid ACPI ID. Remove it and with it > > > ACPI support from the bme680_i2c driver. > > > > Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko > > > > with the SPI part amended in the same way. > > > Right. I just sent a patch doing that. Oddly enough 0-day didn't complain > about that one to me, nor about many other drivers with the same problem. > No idea how it decides if and when to make noise. randconfig I believe. > Is there a way to determine invalid ACPI IDs ? I could write a coccinelle > script to remove the code automatically. As Hans said... My understanding that most of the fake IDs come into life due to: - people apply similar rules to them as they knew about OF case (and certain maintainers blindly allowed that) - people in big companies need to quickly prototype something without giving a crap about ACPI specification and / or process The last part (I believe the smallest one) is vendors who heard about ACPI, but haven't enough knowledge about the process. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko