From: lee.jones@linaro.org (Lee Jones)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/1] mfd: Fix runtime warning caused by duplicate device registration
Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2012 14:12:09 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FF592A9.5050706@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120705130306.GI4111@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
On 05/07/12 14:03, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 01:55:50PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
>> On 05/07/12 13:45, Mark Brown wrote:
>
>>> Right, so what I'm saying is that what I'd expect unless there's
>>> something unusual going on is that you wouldn't be doing the separate
>>> registration of the AB8500 here and would instead be passing the
>>> platform data for the AB8500 through in the same way you pass the DT
>>> data through.
>
>> Then were would you register it, if not here?
>
> Same place as for DT.
That is a possibility, but the idea is to reduce code in the platform
area, not add to it. We'd also need a completely separate platform_data
structure to the one we use for platform registration, as much of it has
now been moved into Device Tree. The regulators are a good example of
this, but there's also GPIO information which is no longer relevant etc.
I do believe that registering the AB8500 from the DB8500 is appropriate
though, for the simple reason that the AB8500 is a sub-device to the
DB8500. I think this is the correct thing to do. But anyway, as I said
before, that ship has sailed. We _already_ do this. All this patch does
is prevent the AB8500 from being registered twice when DT is not enabled.
--
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
M: +44 77 88 633 515
Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linus.walleij@stericsson.com,
arnd@arndb.de, sameo@linux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mfd: Fix runtime warning caused by duplicate device registration
Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2012 14:12:09 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FF592A9.5050706@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120705130306.GI4111@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
On 05/07/12 14:03, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 01:55:50PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
>> On 05/07/12 13:45, Mark Brown wrote:
>
>>> Right, so what I'm saying is that what I'd expect unless there's
>>> something unusual going on is that you wouldn't be doing the separate
>>> registration of the AB8500 here and would instead be passing the
>>> platform data for the AB8500 through in the same way you pass the DT
>>> data through.
>
>> Then were would you register it, if not here?
>
> Same place as for DT.
That is a possibility, but the idea is to reduce code in the platform
area, not add to it. We'd also need a completely separate platform_data
structure to the one we use for platform registration, as much of it has
now been moved into Device Tree. The regulators are a good example of
this, but there's also GPIO information which is no longer relevant etc.
I do believe that registering the AB8500 from the DB8500 is appropriate
though, for the simple reason that the AB8500 is a sub-device to the
DB8500. I think this is the correct thing to do. But anyway, as I said
before, that ship has sailed. We _already_ do this. All this patch does
is prevent the AB8500 from being registered twice when DT is not enabled.
--
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
M: +44 77 88 633 515
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-05 13:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 66+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-03 11:59 [PATCH 1/1] mfd: Fix runtime warning caused by duplicate device registration Lee Jones
2012-07-03 11:59 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-03 12:35 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-03 12:35 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-03 13:07 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-03 13:07 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-03 13:24 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-03 13:24 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-03 13:48 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-03 13:48 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-03 14:21 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-03 14:21 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 7:36 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 7:36 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 9:45 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 9:45 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 11:46 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 11:46 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 12:06 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 12:06 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 12:15 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 12:15 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 12:29 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 12:29 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 12:41 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 12:41 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 12:45 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 12:45 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 12:55 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 12:55 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 13:03 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 13:03 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 13:12 ` Lee Jones [this message]
2012-07-05 13:12 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 13:20 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 13:20 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 13:54 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 13:54 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 13:57 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 13:57 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 14:06 ` Samuel Ortiz
2012-07-05 14:06 ` Samuel Ortiz
2012-07-05 13:57 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-07-05 13:57 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-07-05 14:04 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 14:04 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 14:06 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 14:06 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 14:13 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 14:13 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 14:35 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 14:35 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 15:41 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-07-05 15:41 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-07-05 15:51 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 15:51 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-03 14:01 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-07-03 14:01 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-07-03 14:43 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-03 14:43 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-05 7:33 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 7:33 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 13:08 ` Fabio Estevam
2012-07-05 13:08 ` Fabio Estevam
2012-07-05 13:13 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-05 13:13 ` Lee Jones
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4FF592A9.5050706@linaro.org \
--to=lee.jones@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.