From d1e85308feed8ea66d2af71860130f004d5f9632 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Simon Glass Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 21:20:23 -0700 Subject: x86: Simplify acpi_device_infer_name() There is no-longer any need to check if sequence numbers are valid, since this is ensured by driver model. Drop the unwanted logic. Signed-off-by: Simon Glass --- test/dm/acpi.c | 6 +----- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-) (limited to 'test') diff --git a/test/dm/acpi.c b/test/dm/acpi.c index c5c3726382e..e0a323ecd40 100644 --- a/test/dm/acpi.c +++ b/test/dm/acpi.c @@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ UCLASS_DRIVER(testacpi) = { static int dm_test_acpi_get_name(struct unit_test_state *uts) { char name[ACPI_NAME_MAX]; - struct udevice *dev, *dev2, *i2c, *spi, *serial, *timer, *sound; + struct udevice *dev, *dev2, *i2c, *spi, *timer, *sound; struct udevice *pci, *root; /* Test getting the name from the driver */ @@ -146,10 +146,6 @@ static int dm_test_acpi_get_name(struct unit_test_state *uts) ut_assertok(acpi_get_name(spi, name)); ut_asserteq_str("SPI0", name); - /* The uart has no sequence number, so this should fail */ - ut_assertok(uclass_first_device(UCLASS_SERIAL, &serial)); - ut_asserteq(-ENXIO, acpi_get_name(serial, name)); - /* ACPI doesn't know about the timer */ ut_assertok(uclass_first_device(UCLASS_TIMER, &timer)); ut_asserteq(-ENOENT, acpi_get_name(timer, name)); -- cgit v1.3.1