On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 12:51:59PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 01:54:41PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Thursday, January 10, 2013 02:38:37 PM Mika Westerberg wrote: > > > > 3. We make the acpi_create_platform_device() match on, lets say > > > "INT33C" (a partial match), and in such case it assumes that we are > > > running on Lynxpoint. It will then create platform device for > > > 'clk-lpt'. > > > > 4. Now the clk-lpt driver creates the clocks. > > > > 5. The SPI driver gets the clock it wants. > > > That sounds reasonable to me. Mark, what do you think? > > Sounds sensible, yes - about what I'd expect. Is it possible to match > on CPUID or similar information (given that this is all in the SoC) > instead of ACPI, that might be more robust I guess?
I can look into that but I'm not sure whether there are any other way to detect are we running on Lynxpoint or not, except the device IDs (and even that is not 100% guaranteed because of ACPI _CIDs). -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
