Hi Mika,
/* @@ -469,8 +472,11 @@ static int hisi_lpc_acpi_probe(struct device *hostdev) struct acpi_device *child; int size, ret, count = 0, cell_num = 0;- list_for_each_entry(child, &adev->children, node) + list_for_each_entry(child, &adev->children, node) { + if (acpi_is_pnp_device(child)) + continue; cell_num++; + } /* allocate the mfd cell and companion ACPI info, one per child */ size = sizeof(*mfd_cells) + sizeof(*hisi_lpc_mfd_cells); @@ -492,6 +498,9 @@ static int hisi_lpc_acpi_probe(struct device *hostdev) .pnpid = pnpid, }; + if (acpi_is_pnp_device(child)) + continue; + /* * For any instances of this host controller (Hip06 and Hip07 * are the only chipsets), we would not have multiple slaves @@ -523,6 +532,33 @@ static int hisi_lpc_acpi_probe(struct device *hostdev) return ret; } + list_for_each_entry(child, &adev->children, node) { + struct pnp_resource *pnp_res; + struct pnp_dev *pnp_dev; + int rc; + + if (!acpi_is_pnp_device(child)) + continue; + + pnp_dev = child->driver_data;...or better yet a PNP helper function that makes this more understandable.
Sure, but I would not say the helper function would do the same, due to to (ab)use of driver_data element. As I mentioned in patch 1/2, I couldn't see a current method for the acpi_device to reference the PNP device.
+ + /* + * Prior to adding the device, we need to translate the + * resources to logical PIO addresses. + */ + list_for_each_entry(pnp_res, &pnp_dev->resources, list) { + struct resource *res = &pnp_res->res; + + if (res->flags | IORESOURCE_IO)I think you should use if (resource_type(res) == IORESOURCE_IO) instead.
Yes, since I don't know the difference between logical OR and logical AND :)
+ hisi_lpc_acpi_xlat_io_res(child, adev, res); + } + rc = pnp_add_device(pnp_dev); + if (rc) { + put_device(&pnp_dev->dev); + return rc; + } + } +
Cheers, John
return 0; } -- 1.9.1.
