From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: pawel.moll@arm.com (Pawel Moll) Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2014 17:36:25 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 3/5] mmc: sdhci-pltfm: Do not use parent as the host's device In-Reply-To: <1406298233-27876-3-git-send-email-pawel.moll@arm.com> References: <1406298233-27876-1-git-send-email-pawel.moll@arm.com> <1406298233-27876-3-git-send-email-pawel.moll@arm.com> Message-ID: <1407515785.31897.28.camel@hornet> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Fri, 2014-07-25 at 15:23 +0100, Pawel Moll wrote: > The code selecting a device for the sdhci host has been > continuously tweaked (4b711cb13843f5082e82970dd1e8031383134a65 > "mmc: sdhci-pltfm: Add structure for host-specific data" and > a4d2177f00a5252d825236c5124bc1e9918bdb41 "mmc: sdhci-pltfm: dt > device does not pass parent to sdhci_alloc_host") while there > does not seem to be any reason to use platform device's parent > in the first place. > > The comment saying "Some PCI-based MFD need the parent here" > seem to refer to Timberdale FPGA driver (the only MFD driver > registering SDHCI cell, drivers/mfd/timberdale.c) but again, > the only situation when parent device matter is runtime PM, > which is not implemented for Timberdale. > > Cc: Chris Ball > Cc: Anton Vorontsov > Cc: Ulf Hansson > Cc: linux-mmc at vger.kernel.org > Cc: linuxppc-dev at lists.ozlabs.org > Signed-off-by: Pawel Moll > --- > > This patch is a part of effort to remove references to platform_bus > and make it static. > > Chris, Anton, Ulf - could you please advise if the assumptions > above are correct or if I'm completely wrong? Do you know what > where the real reasons to use parent originally? The PCI comment > seems like a red herring to me... Can I take the silence as a suggestion that the change looks ok-ish for you? Pawe?