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=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 3A408C433DB for ; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 14:58:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from alsa0.perex.cz (alsa0.perex.cz [77.48.224.243]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 85F7364E07 for ; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 14:58:11 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 85F7364E07 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Received: from alsa1.perex.cz (alsa1.perex.cz [207.180.221.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C0417850; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 15:57:18 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 alsa0.perex.cz C0417850 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=alsa-project.org; s=default; t=1613487488; bh=bOCPseYYGvArkT5mu3VU8UuojJ6kMS4SwFb0n/OmXig=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:Cc:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From; b=A+hnOOXNJOr0L5nrLabZYcoZ73xh7y/ixvOB5JjWL2iU4ztWIZaaU+/54ARPZaLhQ YzKu73EhiBN5XbmPcZDNWiXKIZ1Zvm3C3opwwpptIV/SLJxw94BixkrKWkSBniy5gB 3qsSX5dTAB2WDV52wQkmV9HGP7hm+Qja2scNlFRg= Received: from alsa1.perex.cz (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42CBCF80155; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 15:57:18 +0100 (CET) Received: by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix, from userid 50401) id 95905F8015A; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 15:57:16 +0100 (CET) Received: from mga07.intel.com (mga07.intel.com [134.134.136.100]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by alsa1.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 11AC4F800AE for ; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 15:57:06 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 alsa1.perex.cz 11AC4F800AE IronPort-SDR: gTHNaHOXGHREL7MfjCNYpIxxS91qqdUpJZyFIn4AI6GqyCTaOho+i+QIQ5UlLkvQm83RM/5AFZ 2JNfLRbymoKg== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9896"; a="246969179" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.81,183,1610438400"; d="scan'208";a="246969179" Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by orsmga105.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Feb 2021 06:57:02 -0800 IronPort-SDR: Zq8HeEFeVHOnTSnG3IYXfriCk8fqQlPxgpK1Y13YT0NeoKk6/diCeKu85sfiEYrJMO2cvVSdy8 8Xdh08xlsvxA== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.81,183,1610438400"; d="scan'208";a="361706392" Received: from nshettyk-mobl1.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.212.9.66]) ([10.212.9.66]) by orsmga003-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Feb 2021 06:56:58 -0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] platform/x86: dell-privacy: Add support for Dell hardware privacy To: Perry Yuan , Perry Yuan , oder_chiou@realtek.com, perex@perex.cz, tiwai@suse.com, hdegoede@redhat.com, mgross@linux.intel.com References: <20210112171723.19484-1-Perry_Yuan@Dell.com> <79277bf2-3c9e-8b66-47a9-b926a2576f7f@gmail.com> From: Pierre-Louis Bossart Message-ID: <31982e8d-3b0d-7187-8798-900f95d876ee@linux.intel.com> Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2021 08:56:52 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <79277bf2-3c9e-8b66-47a9-b926a2576f7f@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, Mario.Limonciello@dell.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lgirdwood@gmail.com, platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, broonie@kernel.org X-BeenThere: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: "Alsa-devel mailing list for ALSA developers - http://www.alsa-project.org" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Sender: "Alsa-devel" >>> +static const struct acpi_device_id privacy_acpi_device_ids[] = { >>> +    {"PNP0C09", 0}, >>> +    { }, >>> +}; >>> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, privacy_acpi_device_ids); >>> + >>> +static struct platform_driver dell_privacy_platform_drv = { >>> +    .driver = { >>> +        .name = PRIVACY_PLATFORM_NAME, >>> +        .acpi_match_table = ACPI_PTR(privacy_acpi_device_ids), >>> +    }, >> >> no .probe? > Originally i added the probe here, but it cause the driver  .probe > called twice. after i use platform_driver_probe to register the driver > loading process, the duplicated probe issue resolved. > > I >> >>> +    .remove = dell_privacy_acpi_remove, >>> +}; >>> + >>> +int __init dell_privacy_acpi_init(void) >>> +{ >>> +    int err; >>> +    struct platform_device *pdev; >>> +    int privacy_capable = wmi_has_guid(DELL_PRIVACY_GUID); >>> + >>> +    if (!wmi_has_guid(DELL_PRIVACY_GUID)) >>> +        return -ENODEV; >>> + >>> +    privacy_acpi = kzalloc(sizeof(*privacy_acpi), GFP_KERNEL); >>> +    if (!privacy_acpi) >>> +        return -ENOMEM; >>> + >>> +    pdev = platform_device_register_simple( >>> +            PRIVACY_PLATFORM_NAME, PLATFORM_DEVID_NONE, NULL, 0); >>> +    if (IS_ERR(pdev)) { >>> +        err = PTR_ERR(pdev); >>> +        goto pdev_err; >>> +    } >>> +    err = platform_driver_probe(&dell_privacy_platform_drv, >>> +            dell_privacy_acpi_probe); >>> +    if (err) >>> +        goto pdrv_err; >> >> why is the probe done here? Put differently, what prevents you from >> using a 'normal' platform driver, and do the leds_setup in the .probe()? > At first ,I used the normal platform driver framework, however tt cause > the driver  .probe called twice. after i use platform_driver_probe to > register the driver loading process, the duplicated probe issue resolved. This sounds very odd... this looks like a conflict with the ACPI subsystem finding a device and probing the driver that's associated with the PNP0C09 HID, and then this module __init creating a device manually which leads to a second probe Neither the platform_device_register_simple() nor platform_driver_probe() seem necessary?