From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from buildserver.ru.mvista.com (unknown [85.21.88.6]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04BC8DE6DA for ; Thu, 22 May 2008 02:48:42 +1000 (EST) Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 20:48:41 +0400 From: Anton Vorontsov To: Guennadi Liakhovetski Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] [OF] spi_of: add support for dedicated SPI constructors Message-ID: <20080521164841.GA17813@polina.dev.rtsoft.ru> References: <20080521154103.GA32577@polina.dev.rtsoft.ru> <20080521154139.GB4566@polina.dev.rtsoft.ru> <20080521161039.GA9050@polina.dev.rtsoft.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf8 In-Reply-To: Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Gary Jennejohn Reply-To: avorontsov@ru.mvista.com List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 06:24:58PM +0200, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > On Wed, 21 May 2008, Anton Vorontsov wrote: > > > On Wed, May 21, 2008 at 05:56:33PM +0200, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > > > > > > Hm, I might well misunderstand something here, but it looks to me like you > > > are again trying to use both OF _and_ platform (spi_board_info) bindings > > > for your SPI setup? > > > > Yes, you didn't misunderstand. ;-) > > > > > And this is exactly what we are trying to avoid in > > > Grant's series of patches... > > > > I didn't find other way... The show stopper is "master" argument, > > drivers don't know about masters (and should not, since if they should, > > then this implies that masters should be registered prior to devices, > > and that complicates everything). > > > > What is the problem with board infos, btw? I missed that part. Board > > In short: board infos are not bad as such. I find it bad if you have to > use both OF and platform bindings to describe _one_ piece of hardware. This particular discussion isn't about describing hardware (since we're describing it via device tree), but about implementation details, such as: 1. Passing platform_data to the drivers; 2. Creating "SPI Linux devices" from the OF description. I see there ways: 1. Grant Likely's approach (works great for simple drivers which don't need SPI platform_data). 2. Old board infos approach, there we can do whatever we want. 3. Implementing OF bindings for the every SPI driver that needs platform_data. I could do "3", let's see what it will look like... -- Anton Vorontsov email: cbouatmailru@gmail.com irc://irc.freenode.net/bd2