Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1354923 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH] i2c: designware: Add device HID for future AMD I2C controller

Started byJarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com>
First post2016-03-10 09:40 +0100
Last post2016-03-12 17:10 +0100
Articles 3 — 3 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  Re: [PATCH] i2c: designware: Add device HID for future AMD I2C  controller Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com> - 2016-03-10 09:40 +0100
    Re: [PATCH] i2c: designware: Add device HID for future AMD I2C controller "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net> - 2016-03-10 23:50 +0100
    Re: [PATCH] i2c: designware: Add device HID for future AMD I2C  controller Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de> - 2016-03-12 17:10 +0100

#1354923 — Re: [PATCH] i2c: designware: Add device HID for future AMD I2C controller

FromJarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com>
Date2016-03-10 09:40 +0100
SubjectRe: [PATCH] i2c: designware: Add device HID for future AMD I2C controller
Message-ID<rb4iu-4fF-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
On 03/10/2016 01:34 PM, Xiangliang Yu wrote:
> Add device HID AMDI0010 to match the AMD ACPI Vendor ID (AMDI) that
> was registered in http://www.uefi.org/acpi_id_list, and the I2C
> controller on future AMD paltform will use the HID instead of AMD0010.
>
> Signed-off-by: Xiangliang Yu <Xiangliang.Yu@amd.com>
> ---
>   drivers/acpi/acpi_apd.c                     | 1 +
>   drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-platdrv.c | 1 +
>   2 files changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_apd.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_apd.c
> index d507cf6..d0aad06 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_apd.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_apd.c
> @@ -143,6 +143,7 @@ static const struct acpi_device_id acpi_apd_device_ids[] = {
>   	/* Generic apd devices */
>   #ifdef CONFIG_X86_AMD_PLATFORM_DEVICE
>   	{ "AMD0010", APD_ADDR(cz_i2c_desc) },
> +	{ "AMDI0010", APD_ADDR(cz_i2c_desc) },
>   	{ "AMD0020", APD_ADDR(cz_uart_desc) },
>   	{ "AMD0030", },
>   #endif
> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-platdrv.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-platdrv.c
> index 438f1b4..d656657 100644
> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-platdrv.c
> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-platdrv.c
> @@ -123,6 +123,7 @@ static const struct acpi_device_id dw_i2c_acpi_match[] = {
>   	{ "80860F41", 0 },
>   	{ "808622C1", 0 },
>   	{ "AMD0010", ACCESS_INTR_MASK },
> +	{ "AMDI0010", ACCESS_INTR_MASK },
>   	{ "AMDI0510", 0 },
>   	{ "APMC0D0F", 0 },
>   	{ }
> --
I guess these changes don't necessarily need to go together? Although I 
think chances to get a conflict is pretty low.

For i2c-designware:
Acked-by: Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com>

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]


#1355437 — Re: [PATCH] i2c: designware: Add device HID for future AMD I2C controller

From"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
Date2016-03-10 23:50 +0100
SubjectRe: [PATCH] i2c: designware: Add device HID for future AMD I2C controller
Message-ID<rbhz4-59y-11@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1354923
On Thursday, March 10, 2016 10:32:04 AM Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> On 03/10/2016 01:34 PM, Xiangliang Yu wrote:
> > Add device HID AMDI0010 to match the AMD ACPI Vendor ID (AMDI) that
> > was registered in http://www.uefi.org/acpi_id_list, and the I2C
> > controller on future AMD paltform will use the HID instead of AMD0010.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Xiangliang Yu <Xiangliang.Yu@amd.com>
> > ---
> >   drivers/acpi/acpi_apd.c                     | 1 +
> >   drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-platdrv.c | 1 +
> >   2 files changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_apd.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_apd.c
> > index d507cf6..d0aad06 100644
> > --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_apd.c
> > +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_apd.c
> > @@ -143,6 +143,7 @@ static const struct acpi_device_id acpi_apd_device_ids[] = {
> >   	/* Generic apd devices */
> >   #ifdef CONFIG_X86_AMD_PLATFORM_DEVICE
> >   	{ "AMD0010", APD_ADDR(cz_i2c_desc) },
> > +	{ "AMDI0010", APD_ADDR(cz_i2c_desc) },
> >   	{ "AMD0020", APD_ADDR(cz_uart_desc) },
> >   	{ "AMD0030", },
> >   #endif
> > diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-platdrv.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-platdrv.c
> > index 438f1b4..d656657 100644
> > --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-platdrv.c
> > +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-platdrv.c
> > @@ -123,6 +123,7 @@ static const struct acpi_device_id dw_i2c_acpi_match[] = {
> >   	{ "80860F41", 0 },
> >   	{ "808622C1", 0 },
> >   	{ "AMD0010", ACCESS_INTR_MASK },
> > +	{ "AMDI0010", ACCESS_INTR_MASK },
> >   	{ "AMDI0510", 0 },
> >   	{ "APMC0D0F", 0 },
> >   	{ }
> > --
> I guess these changes don't necessarily need to go together? Although I 
> think chances to get a conflict is pretty low.
> 
> For i2c-designware:
> Acked-by: Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com>

OK, queued up for 4.6, thanks!

Rafael

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1356466

FromWolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>
Date2016-03-12 17:10 +0100
Message-ID<rbUh4-gw-19@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1354923

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 10:32:04AM +0200, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> On 03/10/2016 01:34 PM, Xiangliang Yu wrote:
> >Add device HID AMDI0010 to match the AMD ACPI Vendor ID (AMDI) that
> >was registered in http://www.uefi.org/acpi_id_list, and the I2C
> >controller on future AMD paltform will use the HID instead of AMD0010.
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Xiangliang Yu <Xiangliang.Yu@amd.com>
> >---
> >  drivers/acpi/acpi_apd.c                     | 1 +
> >  drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-platdrv.c | 1 +
> >  2 files changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >
> >diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_apd.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_apd.c
> >index d507cf6..d0aad06 100644
> >--- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_apd.c
> >+++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_apd.c
> >@@ -143,6 +143,7 @@ static const struct acpi_device_id acpi_apd_device_ids[] = {
> >  	/* Generic apd devices */
> >  #ifdef CONFIG_X86_AMD_PLATFORM_DEVICE
> >  	{ "AMD0010", APD_ADDR(cz_i2c_desc) },
> >+	{ "AMDI0010", APD_ADDR(cz_i2c_desc) },
> >  	{ "AMD0020", APD_ADDR(cz_uart_desc) },
> >  	{ "AMD0030", },
> >  #endif
> >diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-platdrv.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-platdrv.c
> >index 438f1b4..d656657 100644
> >--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-platdrv.c
> >+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-platdrv.c
> >@@ -123,6 +123,7 @@ static const struct acpi_device_id dw_i2c_acpi_match[] = {
> >  	{ "80860F41", 0 },
> >  	{ "808622C1", 0 },
> >  	{ "AMD0010", ACCESS_INTR_MASK },
> >+	{ "AMDI0010", ACCESS_INTR_MASK },
> >  	{ "AMDI0510", 0 },
> >  	{ "APMC0D0F", 0 },
> >  	{ }
> >--
> I guess these changes don't necessarily need to go together? Although I
> think chances to get a conflict is pretty low.

I would have preferred seperate patches, too.

> For i2c-designware:
> Acked-by: Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com>

For the record:

Acked-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel


csiph-web