On Sunday 12 of April 2009 19:58:00 Mark Brown wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 07:20:15PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > On Sunday 12 of April 2009 19:06:26 Mark Brown wrote:
> > > > +static struct platform_device palmld_pxa2xx_pcm = {
> > >
> > > This should follow the pattern that everything else uses with the
> > > struct platform_device in devices.c and board files triggering
> > > registration of that.
> >
> > Half of the platforms use static struct, half use struct. Probably
> > someone should send a huge patch to make it consistent. I'd like to have
> > it consistent at least inside the platform file.
>
> The general rule is that if it's a part of the CPU it should go in
> devices.c - things that aren't doing that are mostly just waiting for
> cleanup.
>
> > > > +static struct platform_device palmld_pxa2xx_ac97 = {
> > > > +	.name = "pxa2xx-ac97",
> > > > +	.id   = -1,
> > > > +	.dev  = {
> > > > +		.platform_data = &palmld_ac97_pdata,
> > > > +	},
> > > > +};
> > >
> > > No, use pxa_set_ac97_info().
> >
> > How?
>
> Pass the platform data as the argument.  This will currently involve
> merging the two different platform data structures that we have right
> now.

OK, I see, thanks :-) Will you be happier with this patch then ?