28 Oct
2013
28 Oct
'13
6:46 p.m.
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 05:23:45PM +0200, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
On 10/28/2013 05:06 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
Indeed. The way I initially read the suggestion above the idea was to replace the bus number with the ACPI name for the device which seemed sensible but now I reread the bus number is still there.
Sorry, my textual proposal above was confusing and should have used different variables for ACPI name. What I meant was "spix.y" -> "spi-INTABCD:ij" and "x-00yz" to "i2c-INTABCD:ij" where "INTABCD:ij" was the ACPI device name which contains the device instance in "ij".
Ah, OK - it's actually what I read it as in the first place then!