Re: [PATCH v1 01/10] spi: pxa2xx: Drop ACPI_PTR() and of_match_ptr()

From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-spi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Daniel Mack <daniel@zonque.org>,
	Haojian Zhuang <haojian.zhuang@gmail.com>,
	Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@free.fr>,
	Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 01/10] spi: pxa2xx: Drop ACPI_PTR() and of_match_ptr()
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2024 18:25:16 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <424de3ed-f0ea-4fc1-80f5-3ab1d23cf1e1@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZgMSg5Tr97mWgPW4@smile.fi.intel.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 970 bytes --]

On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 08:22:59PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 06:16:28PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 08:07:51PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

> > > Drop rather useless use of ACPI_PTR() and of_match_ptr().
> > > It also removes the necessity to be dependent on ACPI and
> > > of.h inclusion.

> > I think the ACPI dependency there is as much about hiding the device on
> > irrelevant platforms as anything else, might be better replaced with an
> > x86 dependency though.

> The whole idea behind ACPI_PTR() (which seems following the of_match_ptr()
> implementation) looks premature. Now we have a lot of patches from DT people to
> remove of_match_ptr(), i.o.w. make the ID visible even on non-OF platforms.

> Having the list of supported IDs is not bad thing anyway as it might help
> to google for a device elsewhere, for example.

That's nice but I'm not sure what that has to do with the dependency on
ACPI?

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]