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.
> + { }
> +};
> +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?
Will
