From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com (Mark Brown) Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 09:08:36 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 2/2] mfd: anatop: permit adata be NULL when access register In-Reply-To: <20120514035137.GB20367@S2100-06.ap.freescale.net> References: <1336870794-6351-1-git-send-email-richard.zhao@freescale.com> <1336870794-6351-2-git-send-email-richard.zhao@freescale.com> <20120514035137.GB20367@S2100-06.ap.freescale.net> Message-ID: <20120514080835.GB31985@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 11:51:38AM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote: > From what I see, it's reasonable. Then the immediate question I have > is, should we remove "struct anatop *adata" from anatop_read_reg and > anatop_write_reg completely? Given the way these things tend to go it's probably guaranteeing that your next round of SoCs will have two register compatible anatop blocks :) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: