From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Lutomirski Subject: Re: [PATCH] intel-hid: new hid event driver for hotkeys Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 10:29:49 -0700 Message-ID: References: <1450337402-4178-1-git-send-email-alex.hung@canonical.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Return-path: Received: from mail-ua0-f181.google.com ([209.85.217.181]:35907 "EHLO mail-ua0-f181.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933853AbcI2RaL (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Sep 2016 13:30:11 -0400 Received: by mail-ua0-f181.google.com with SMTP id n13so72212157uaa.3 for ; Thu, 29 Sep 2016 10:30:11 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Sender: platform-driver-x86-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Dmitry Torokhov Cc: Alex Hung , Darren Hart , platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 9:02 AM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > Quite a bit late, but still: > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 11:30 PM, Alex Hung wrote: >> + >> +static int __init intel_hid_init(void) >> +{ >> + acpi_walk_namespace(ACPI_TYPE_DEVICE, ACPI_ROOT_OBJECT, >> + ACPI_UINT32_MAX, check_acpi_dev, NULL, >> + (void *)intel_hid_ids, NULL); >> + >> + return platform_driver_register(&intel_hid_pl_driver); >> +} > > Why do we need to walk instantiate the device ourselves instead of > having ACPI core do it for us? I also see this pattern in intel-vbtn.c > now. See the comment above check_acpi_dev(): /* * Unfortunately, some laptops provide a _HID="INT33D5" device with * _CID="PNP0C02". This causes the pnpacpi scan driver to claim the * ACPI node, so no platform device will be created. The pnpacpi * driver rejects this device in subsequent processing, so no physical * node is created at all. * * As a workaround until the ACPI core figures out how to handle * this corner case, manually ask the ACPI platform device code to * claim the ACPI node. */ > > Thanks. > > -- > Dmitry -- Andy Lutomirski AMA Capital Management, LLC