On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 08:33:42 +0000 Ankit Agrawal <ank...@nvidia.com> wrote:
> >> As for your suggestion of using acpi-dev as the arg to take both > >> pci-dev and acpi-dev.. Would that mean sending a pure pci device > >> (not the corner case you mentioned) through the acpi-dev argument > >> as well? Not sure if that would appropriate. > > > > Ah, looking up my description is unclear. I meant two optional parameters > > pci-dev or acpi-dev - which one was supplied would indicate the type > > of handle to be used. > > Yes, that makes sense. But for now only have pci-dev until we have any > acpi-dev related code added? IIRC, this is what we discussed earlier. Yep, I think we acknowledged that this device supports either PCI or ACPI devices and we only currently have a use case for PCI devices, so that's what's implemented and what the interface expects. A separate ACPI device interface could be added later or derived from updating the interface to accept a generic device object. Thanks, Alex
