From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Courtney Cavin Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/6] Support for QPNP PMIC's Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 14:28:11 -0700 Message-ID: <20140625212811.GD10905@sonymobile.com> References: <1403266885-911-1-git-send-email-svarbanov@mm-sol.com> <20140624223604.GB10905@sonymobile.com> <53AAAD61.3020605@mm-sol.com> <20140625180415.GC10905@sonymobile.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Return-path: Received: from seldrel01.sonyericsson.com ([212.209.106.2]:4026 "EHLO seldrel01.sonyericsson.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754948AbaFYVZr (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jun 2014 17:25:47 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arm-msm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org To: Rob Herring Cc: Stanimir Varbanov , Grant Likely , Greg Kroah-Hartman , "linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org" , "Ivan T. Ivanov" , Josh Cartwright , Stephen Boyd On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 11:18:57PM +0200, Rob Herring wrote: > On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 1:04 PM, Courtney Cavin > wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 01:07:13PM +0200, Stanimir Varbanov wrote: > >> On 06/25/2014 01:36 AM, Courtney Cavin wrote: > > Greg, Grant, Rob? What's the law? > > Generally sub-blocks of a device are handled as platform devices. If > there is a good enough reason then creating a new device type may be > okay, but we certainly wouldn't want every PMIC or MFD driver to go > off and define their own bus. Probably not each vendor doing a bus > either. Thanks for the clarification! > > On a related note, it would probably be a good idea to move much of the > > platform resource stuff out of the platform code... so we don't > > re-implement it over-and-over again. > > Which part is implemented over-and-over? These two, and all the convenient wrapper/population functions: struct resource *resource; u32 num_resources; -Courtney