"Miscellaneous" bus for the driver model?

"Miscellaneous" bus for the driver model?

[Alan Stern]

Would it make sense for the driver model core to add a "miscellaneous" or 
"other" bus, intended for devices or drivers that are one-of-a-kind or 
otherwise non-standard?  Kind of similar to the platform bus but meant 
for new things, not part of a legacy or other system/architecture-specific 
base?

Doing this would give people a place to register these things without 
forcing them to go to the trouble of making up their own special-purpose 
bus or class.  And without the extra code/data space a special-purpose 
driver-specific bus would require.

Alan Stern

Re: "Miscellaneous" bus for the driver model?

[Greg KH]

On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 11:00:16AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> Would it make sense for the driver model core to add a "miscellaneous" or 
> "other" bus, intended for devices or drivers that are one-of-a-kind or 
> otherwise non-standard?  Kind of similar to the platform bus but meant 
> for new things, not part of a legacy or other system/architecture-specific 
> base?

That's what the "legacy" bus is for.  There's a patch floating around
that renames that bus to "platform" to remove any connotation that
"legacy" might occur.

Hope this helps,

greg k-h

Re: "Miscellaneous" bus for the driver model?

[Russell King]

On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 09:33:45AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 11:00:16AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> > Would it make sense for the driver model core to add a "miscellaneous" or 
> > "other" bus, intended for devices or drivers that are one-of-a-kind or 
> > otherwise non-standard?  Kind of similar to the platform bus but meant 
> > for new things, not part of a legacy or other system/architecture-specific 
> > base?
> 
> That's what the "legacy" bus is for.  There's a patch floating around
> that renames that bus to "platform" to remove any connotation that
> "legacy" might occur.

Can we get this patch merged ASAP please?  It should really have gone
in before 2.6 so we don't have this change during a stable kernel series.

-- 
Russell King
 Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
 maintainer of:  2.6 PCMCIA      - http://pcmcia.arm.linux.org.uk/
                 2.6 Serial core

Re: "Miscellaneous" bus for the driver model?

[Jeff Garzik]

Russell King wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 09:33:45AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> 
>>On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 11:00:16AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
>>
>>>Would it make sense for the driver model core to add a "miscellaneous" or 
>>>"other" bus, intended for devices or drivers that are one-of-a-kind or 
>>>otherwise non-standard?  Kind of similar to the platform bus but meant 
>>>for new things, not part of a legacy or other system/architecture-specific 
>>>base?
>>
>>That's what the "legacy" bus is for.  There's a patch floating around
>>that renames that bus to "platform" to remove any connotation that
>>"legacy" might occur.
> 
> 
> Can we get this patch merged ASAP please?  It should really have gone
> in before 2.6 so we don't have this change during a stable kernel series.


It's already in :)

	Jeff



ChangeSet@1.1474.51.99, 2003-12-29 21:54:21-08:00, akpm@osdl.org
   [PATCH] Rename legacy_bus to platform_bus

   From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>

   I've seen this patch floating around.  Not sure the origin, but it's
   surfaced on lkml and also when I was poking around handhelds.org CVS for
   iPAQ patches:  on non-PCs, particularly system-on-chip devices but not
   just there, you have a custom "platform bus" that is the root of pretty
   much all other devices and buses.

   It's something I wanted to make sure people didn't forget; to make sure
   the legacy_bus didn't get "legacied out of existence."  ;-)