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=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,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 DA98CC07E96 for ; Tue, 13 Jul 2021 16:07:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B65FD61175 for ; Tue, 13 Jul 2021 16:07:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229585AbhGMQJ7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Jul 2021 12:09:59 -0400 Received: from perceval.ideasonboard.com ([213.167.242.64]:39514 "EHLO perceval.ideasonboard.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229437AbhGMQJ6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Jul 2021 12:09:58 -0400 Received: from pendragon.ideasonboard.com (62-78-145-57.bb.dnainternet.fi [62.78.145.57]) by perceval.ideasonboard.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1411BCC; Tue, 13 Jul 2021 18:07:07 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ideasonboard.com; s=mail; t=1626192427; bh=7u3NFORVoHd5fpCFXJVJnRfV1NHuvZn9ebeFQRmpx90=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=ODnIbVVNZT6B7eFai6iv16GMp4fSv3pzdRagXY2JhEcH1aX+YyFJF3zy5cAFYX5DV 154OaZk/PpfCxGhNWO4Emfw1HBtPV4E29+g3CsDQMT6+4d+TQ1Ndozf5ILGI9rHsQN NmFM18WoRBQIzkBpFA7h8s2Byrd3cgHVbplkCq4s= Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2021 19:06:20 +0300 From: Laurent Pinchart To: Mark Brown Cc: Daniel Scally , Andy Shevchenko , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Platform Driver , Hans de Goede , Mark Gross , Maximilian Luz , Liam Girdwood , kieran.bingham@ideasonboard.com Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] Add software node support to regulator framework Message-ID: References: <20210712124223.GB4435@sirena.org.uk> <20210712133428.GD4435@sirena.org.uk> <20210712170120.GG4435@sirena.org.uk> <20210713152454.GC4098@sirena.org.uk> <20210713160259.GD4098@sirena.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210713160259.GD4098@sirena.org.uk> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 05:02:59PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 06:42:33PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 04:24:54PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 12:32:26AM +0100, Daniel Scally wrote: > > > > It also creates some problems to suppress the enumeration of the i2c > > > > device via ACPI (which we'll have to do in a machine specific fashion, > > > > because some laptops have this chip with properly configured ACPI and > > > > > > To be clear I think that's a terrible idea. > > > > If you're talking about the ACPI implementation on those machines, > > nobody disagrees :-) > > > > To make sure I understand you correctly, do you advocate for suppressing > > registration of the I2C devices from ACPI and instantiate them from > > board code instead, or to somehow supplement the I2C device with > > board-specific data ? > > No, to repeat yet again that is what I think is a terrible idea. Which of those two ? :-) -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart