From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Igor Grinberg Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: pxa: fix build failure for regulator consumer in em-x270.c Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 16:28:48 +0200 Message-ID: <4F7471A0.6070208@compulab.co.il> References: <1331244366-6147-1-git-send-email-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> <4F732C97.2030804@compulab.co.il> <20120328152743.GW3232@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <4F73356D.5080401@windriver.com> <20120328161305.GZ3232@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <4F73437B.6070806@windriver.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from 50.23.254.54-static.reverse.softlayer.com ([50.23.254.54]:56426 "EHLO softlayer.compulab.co.il" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758633Ab2C2O3B (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Mar 2012 10:29:01 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4F73437B.6070806@windriver.com> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Paul Gortmaker Cc: Mark Brown , haojian.zhuang@gmail.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org On 03/28/12 18:59, Paul Gortmaker wrote: > On 12-03-28 12:13 PM, Mark Brown wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 11:59:41AM -0400, Paul Gortmaker wrote: >>> On 12-03-28 11:27 AM, Mark Brown wrote: >> >>> static struct platform_device em_x270_gps_userspace_consumer = { >>> .name = "reg-userspace-consumer", >>> .id = 0, >> >>> static struct platform_device em_x270_gprs_userspace_consumer = { >>> .name = "reg-userspace-consumer", >>> .id = 1, >> >>> Note that the existing names currently don't incorporate the .id >>> field as a suffix, and so never were unique. >> >> No, this is just a basic part of how platform devices work - the device >> name is always the same and if you've got more than one of them they get >> different .ids. dev_name() returns name.id, or just name if id is set >> to -1 indicating that there's onyl one device of a given type. > > OK, so Igor - can you simply retest the v2 patch, but make the > two trivial changes: > > -REGULATOR_CONSUMER(ldo3, "reg-userspace-consumer", "vcc gps"); > +REGULATOR_CONSUMER(ldo3, "reg-userspace-consumer.0", "vcc gps"); > > -REGULATOR_CONSUMER(ldo19, "reg-userspace-consumer", "vcc gprs"); > +REGULATOR_CONSUMER(ldo19, "reg-userspace-consumer.1", "vcc gprs"); Well, I thought of this solution, but I don't like it, as it makes the whole thing very fragile and sensitive to the reg-userspace-consumer platform device registration order and count, isn't it? (That's why I proposed to use NULL...). So, Mark, how do you think the above issues can be handled without putting NULL into the dev_name? -- Regards, Igor. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: grinberg@compulab.co.il (Igor Grinberg) Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 16:28:48 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: pxa: fix build failure for regulator consumer in em-x270.c In-Reply-To: <4F73437B.6070806@windriver.com> References: <1331244366-6147-1-git-send-email-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> <4F732C97.2030804@compulab.co.il> <20120328152743.GW3232@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <4F73356D.5080401@windriver.com> <20120328161305.GZ3232@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <4F73437B.6070806@windriver.com> Message-ID: <4F7471A0.6070208@compulab.co.il> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 03/28/12 18:59, Paul Gortmaker wrote: > On 12-03-28 12:13 PM, Mark Brown wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 11:59:41AM -0400, Paul Gortmaker wrote: >>> On 12-03-28 11:27 AM, Mark Brown wrote: >> >>> static struct platform_device em_x270_gps_userspace_consumer = { >>> .name = "reg-userspace-consumer", >>> .id = 0, >> >>> static struct platform_device em_x270_gprs_userspace_consumer = { >>> .name = "reg-userspace-consumer", >>> .id = 1, >> >>> Note that the existing names currently don't incorporate the .id >>> field as a suffix, and so never were unique. >> >> No, this is just a basic part of how platform devices work - the device >> name is always the same and if you've got more than one of them they get >> different .ids. dev_name() returns name.id, or just name if id is set >> to -1 indicating that there's onyl one device of a given type. > > OK, so Igor - can you simply retest the v2 patch, but make the > two trivial changes: > > -REGULATOR_CONSUMER(ldo3, "reg-userspace-consumer", "vcc gps"); > +REGULATOR_CONSUMER(ldo3, "reg-userspace-consumer.0", "vcc gps"); > > -REGULATOR_CONSUMER(ldo19, "reg-userspace-consumer", "vcc gprs"); > +REGULATOR_CONSUMER(ldo19, "reg-userspace-consumer.1", "vcc gprs"); Well, I thought of this solution, but I don't like it, as it makes the whole thing very fragile and sensitive to the reg-userspace-consumer platform device registration order and count, isn't it? (That's why I proposed to use NULL...). So, Mark, how do you think the above issues can be handled without putting NULL into the dev_name? -- Regards, Igor.