On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 1:22 PM, Andy Shevchenko andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com wrote:
On Fri, 2018-01-05 at 13:06 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 5:47 PM, Andy Shevchenko andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com wrote:
Sometimes the user want to have device name of the match rather than just checking if device present or not.
I would give an example here.
You mean to mention what is in patch 2? I can do that.
"Subset of Intel ASoC drivers is an existing user of this API when they need to find an actual instance of the codec device based on its ACPI HID."
And why do they need the name (and not something else)?
To make life easier for such users introduce acpi_dev_get_dev_name()
What about acpi_dev_get_match_name() or just acpi_dev_match_name()?
It's "get", not "match".
OK
So, acpi_dev_get_name() then?
It would be somewhat clearer to call it acpi_dev_get_first_match_name() IMO.
Otherwise it may not be clear what name this is going to return.