On Sun, Jun 08, 2025 at 01:46:17PM +0200, Benno Lossin wrote:
> On Sun Jun 8, 2025 at 12:48 PM CEST, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 08, 2025 at 09:54:30AM +0200, Benno Lossin wrote:
> >> On Fri Jun 6, 2025 at 7:08 PM CEST, Igor Korotin wrote:
> >> > @@ -141,6 +141,38 @@ pub trait Adapter {
> >> > /// The type holding driver private data about each device id supported by the driver.
> >> > type IdInfo: 'static;
> >> >
> >> > + /// The [`acpi::IdTable`] of the corresponding driver
> >> > + fn acpi_id_table() -> Option<acpi::IdTable<Self::IdInfo>>;
> >> > +
> >> > + /// Returns the driver's private data from the matching entry in the [`acpi::IdTable`], if any.
> >> > + ///
> >> > + /// If this returns `None`, it means there is no match with an entry in the [`acpi::IdTable`].
> >> > + #[cfg(CONFIG_ACPI)]
> >> > + fn acpi_id_info(dev: &device::Device) -> Option<&'static Self::IdInfo> {
> >> > + let table = Self::acpi_id_table()?;
> >> > +
> >> > + // SAFETY:
> >> > + // - `table` has static lifetime, hence it's valid for read,
> >> > + // - `dev` is guaranteed to be valid while it's alive, and so is `pdev.as_ref().as_raw()`.
> >> > + let raw_id = unsafe { bindings::acpi_match_device(table.as_ptr(), dev.as_raw()) };
> >> > +
> >> > + if raw_id.is_null() {
> >> > + None
> >> > + } else {
> >> > + // SAFETY: `DeviceId` is a `#[repr(transparent)` wrapper of `struct of_device_id` and
> >> > + // does not add additional invariants, so it's safe to transmute.
> >> > + let id = unsafe { &*raw_id.cast::<acpi::DeviceId>() };
> >> > +
> >> > + Some(table.info(<acpi::DeviceId as crate::device_id::RawDeviceId>::index(id)))
> >> > + }
> >> > + }
> >> > +
> >> > + #[cfg(not(CONFIG_ACPI))]
> >> > + #[allow(missing_docs)]
> >>
> >> I think we should change this to one single definition and do
> >>
> >> if cfg!(not(CONFIG_ACPI)) {
> >> return None;
> >> }
> >> /* body from above */
> >>
> >> In a single function instead.
> >
> > Generally, that's fine, but in this case I'd rather keep it as it is for
> > consistency with the rest of the file.
>
> Then let's also change the OF bindings in this file to that style :)
Fine for me.
@Igor: If you do so, please do it in a seaparate patch.
> >> > + fn acpi_id_info(_dev: &device::Device) -> Option<&'static Self::IdInfo> {
> >> > + None
> >> > + }
> >> > +
> >> > /// The [`of::IdTable`] of the corresponding driver.
> >> > fn of_id_table() -> Option<of::IdTable<Self::IdInfo>>;
> >> >
> >> > @@ -178,6 +210,11 @@ fn of_id_info(_dev: &device::Device) -> Option<&'static Self::IdInfo> {
> >> > /// If this returns `None`, it means that there is no match in any of the ID tables directly
> >> > /// associated with a [`device::Device`].
> >> > fn id_info(dev: &device::Device) -> Option<&'static Self::IdInfo> {
> >> > + let id = Self::acpi_id_info(dev);
> >> > + if id.is_some() {
> >> > + return id;
> >> > + }
> >>
> >> Is a driver only going to have one id_info? Or is there some kind of
> >> precedence?
> >
> > A driver potentially has lots of them, but the device is only matching a single
> > entry in one of the driver's ID tables and hence a single ID info.
>
> Ah so if `of_id_info` and `acpi_id_info` return `Some(_)`, then both
> values are the same?
No, if one of them returns Some(_), the other one will always return None. Or
phrased differently, the first match will always be the only match.
