* ath6kl DT support and multiple instances.
@ 2014-08-19 7:22 Srinivas Kandagatla
2014-08-19 7:38 ` Kalle Valo
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Srinivas Kandagatla @ 2014-08-19 7:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ath6kl, Kalle Valo; +Cc: linux-wireless, devicetree-discuss
Hi Kalle,
I noticed that ath6kl partially supports Device trees, via
check_device_tree() function in init.c.
I have a use case for adding reset line and pinctrl properties to this
dt bindings, but soon realized that this function would not work for
multiple instances of the driver, as there is no direct
association/binding of dt node and driver instance.
Just wondering if this is a know limitation and there will be no
possible multiple instances of this driver?
is check_device_tree function obsolete?
should I care about multiple instances?
Other than adding static code in the board file, are there any other
options to pass platform data like reset gpio lines and pinctrl
properties to the driver?
thanks,
srini
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: ath6kl DT support and multiple instances.
2014-08-19 7:22 ath6kl DT support and multiple instances Srinivas Kandagatla
@ 2014-08-19 7:38 ` Kalle Valo
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Kalle Valo @ 2014-08-19 7:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Srinivas Kandagatla; +Cc: ath6kl, linux-wireless, devicetree-discuss
Hi Srinivas,
Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org> writes:
> I noticed that ath6kl partially supports Device trees, via
> check_device_tree() function in init.c.
That's really old code. Sam Leffler wrote that back in 2011 and IIRC
nobody has touched it since.
> I have a use case for adding reset line and pinctrl properties to this
> dt bindings, but soon realized that this function would not work for
> multiple instances of the driver, as there is no direct
> association/binding of dt node and driver instance.
>
> Just wondering if this is a know limitation and there will be no
> possible multiple instances of this driver?
>
> is check_device_tree function obsolete?
I'm not familiar with the device tree at all so I can't really comment
much, except that I'm happy to take patches :)
> should I care about multiple instances?
Yes, I think you should.
> Other than adding static code in the board file, are there any other
> options to pass platform data like reset gpio lines and pinctrl
> properties to the driver?
Few years back we talked about adding function pointers to the board
files for that, but there never were any patches.
--
Kalle Valo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-08-19 7:38 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-08-19 7:22 ath6kl DT support and multiple instances Srinivas Kandagatla
2014-08-19 7:38 ` Kalle Valo
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.