Hi,
On 4/4/19 12:04 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 05:39:38PM -0500, Jeremy Linton wrote:
Lets add the MODULE_TABLE and platform id_table entries so that
the SPE driver can attach to the ACPI platform device created by
the core pmu code.
Signed-off-by: Jeremy Linton <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Sudeep Holla <[email protected]>
---
drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c | 11 +++++++++--
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c b/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c
index 7cb766dafe85..ffa2c76c08bb 100644
--- a/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c
+++ b/drivers/perf/arm_spe_pmu.c
@@ -1176,7 +1176,13 @@ static const struct of_device_id arm_spe_pmu_of_match[]
= {
};
MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, arm_spe_pmu_of_match);
-static int arm_spe_pmu_device_dt_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
+static const struct platform_device_id arm_spe_match[] = {
+ { "arm,spe-v1", 0},
It would be nice if we could avoid duplicating this string from the ACPI
parsing code.
Ok sure, I just need to find a good common place for it.
+ { }
+};
+MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(platform, arm_spe_match);
+
+static int arm_spe_pmu_device_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
{
int ret;
struct arm_spe_pmu *spe_pmu;
@@ -1236,11 +1242,12 @@ static int arm_spe_pmu_device_remove(struct
platform_device *pdev)
}
static struct platform_driver arm_spe_pmu_driver = {
+ .id_table = arm_spe_match,
.driver = {
.name = DRVNAME,
.of_match_table = of_match_ptr(arm_spe_pmu_of_match),
Hmm, so some other drivers don't hook .id_table like you do, but instead
hook .acpi_match_table in the driver structure. Is that not better?
This isn't actually an ACPI device, (aka not defined in the namespace),
so its missing much of the ACPI functionality. I think that also means
its needs to be declared this way.
Will
