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=-9.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_MED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_NEOMUTT autolearn=ham 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 60274C43387 for ; Fri, 4 Jan 2019 22:25:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26FC0218D3 for ; Fri, 4 Jan 2019 22:25:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lixom-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@lixom-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="wF17zVCh" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726267AbfADWZf (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Jan 2019 17:25:35 -0500 Received: from mail-lj1-f193.google.com ([209.85.208.193]:46349 "EHLO mail-lj1-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726094AbfADWZe (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Jan 2019 17:25:34 -0500 Received: by mail-lj1-f193.google.com with SMTP id v15-v6so33615696ljh.13 for ; Fri, 04 Jan 2019 14:25:33 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lixom-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=Z1vAhmunot0tuVCJlGQCYona7YB7MZcz7CyWz0+X5ZQ=; b=wF17zVChctqEeoWVrYlUDzea2rame9POYdSVMf78CUSgoxjXnPvuTx+ExIHZY1/7VK xuDIEu/F5jzCmG4l+Nx3bp8/zL7c+NAXOPbpPsHRJUuojf+M2Yj/0yME2AZBH1SLgWGe QBGWnQyg69Z5WD0Btw+KwFzC2giUfeg3ScSJO3Ctnb2gcZBpMez9c+AC1ToMXIqF3PLf vENrpTVBL/Hqp862BRQiwcYj0w7BoJLWB1f2zNIs0JbnR6GK7SLWcQBGJnKwRFcsqWOP OSYIEyeCOqdiH3Xn7611H4FbGbODWChNuh/G8g7tRuZPXAvvbkCpRX1iZ/sKoaK1rx03 qLIw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=Z1vAhmunot0tuVCJlGQCYona7YB7MZcz7CyWz0+X5ZQ=; b=rYcSdKiMOfpT1UIbsV8FC9jr4FgC0Mg9LuZ9uHR6w95SXqGF+qst32/2FYgf3N6/4Q CtyuFlCgeUwfLrs9wbsncjqbsP1d1xydtMwyyqhp6MpRYUmady3Iot6Vntk1aMC7mBxQ Zcj8acnn1oeR4uCurXqdLHWxtbrDMoJZ8PZ+lXxCZxjZTN5iRHnCY/AFA2K3pcUXH8mE /X8thQHV3rZT6guL03pZ5FiABVRzsnNfScE9HJvw50Ib7S0JIRYDRz3DxfVrIJp/e2f7 sEJKRn9g2vHvRvbOvR5RSaUaAnyrQk2dYoAr/0fwO1RgZWmxS/5pZdSXGK3OFdP4CglD ynuw== X-Gm-Message-State: AA+aEWbRp35g+d0tZakQV+B2+eyTo4qhmG7y527TPm39fmc4orZzRDlh KWra3WWHtw2jDJtUwVx3jVZECA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN6posxYL/YwSPfmhFiRyEm1hY10TOGPWPlwFAe1RBI3Igu/MVUISzwlfHsTHweU1zNyF9kZ0w== X-Received: by 2002:a2e:868c:: with SMTP id l12-v6mr33259573lji.90.1546640732351; Fri, 04 Jan 2019 14:25:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (h85-30-9-151.cust.a3fiber.se. [85.30.9.151]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 11-v6sm12339958ljv.1.2019.01.04.14.25.30 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Fri, 04 Jan 2019 14:25:30 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2019 14:25:21 -0800 From: Olof Johansson To: John Garry Cc: xuwei5@huawei.com, arm@kernel.org, linuxarm@huawei.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] HISI LPC: Don't fail probe for unrecognised child devices Message-ID: <20190104222521.6r7lmz7so22xu2nj@localhost> References: <1546516622-46343-1-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1546516622-46343-1-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jan 03, 2019 at 07:57:02PM +0800, John Garry wrote: > Currently for ACPI-based FW we fail the probe for an unrecognised child > HID. > > However, there is FW in the field with LPC child devices having fake HIDs, > namely "IPI0002", which was an IPMI device invented to support the > initial out-of-tree LPC host driver, different from the final mainline > version. > > To provide compatibility support for these dodgy FWs, just discard the > unrecognised HIDs instead of failing the probe altogether. > > Tested-by: Zengruan Ye > Signed-off-by: John Garry > > diff --git a/drivers/bus/hisi_lpc.c b/drivers/bus/hisi_lpc.c > index d5f8545..19d7b6f 100644 > --- a/drivers/bus/hisi_lpc.c > +++ b/drivers/bus/hisi_lpc.c > @@ -522,10 +522,9 @@ static int hisi_lpc_acpi_probe(struct device *hostdev) > > if (!found) { > dev_warn(hostdev, > - "could not find cell for child device (%s)\n", > + "could not find cell for child device (%s), discarding\n", > hid); > - ret = -ENODEV; > - goto fail; > + continue; > } This driver is the equivalent of a board file. Wasn't ACPI supposed to spare us from these platform device tables? It even has hardcoded clock information in it. :( Also, we were told that there'll be expectations for users to update their ACPI tables if they're incompatible our out of date. Can that be done here as well? -Olof