From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com (Dmitry Torokhov)
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 15:35:05 -0700
Subject: [PATCHv4][ 1/4] Input: tsc2007: Add device tree support.
In-Reply-To: <20131022114947.30dc9c07@ipc1.ka-ro>
References: <1382363667-10341-1-git-send-email-denis@eukrea.com>
 <20131021155927.GB4255@core.coreip.homeip.net>
 <20131022114947.30dc9c07@ipc1.ka-ro>
Message-ID: <20131022223504.GA19819@core.coreip.homeip.net>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 11:49:47AM +0200, Lothar Wa?mann wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> > On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 03:54:24PM +0200, Denis Carikli wrote:
> > >  
> > > +	if (ts->of)
> > > +		return tsc2007_get_pendown_state_dt(ts);
> > > +
> > >  	if (!ts->get_pendown_state)
> > >  		return true;
> > 
> > Instead of special casing "if (ts->of)" all over the place why don't you
> > set up the device structure as:
> > 
> > 	if (<configuring_tsc2007_form_dt>)
> > 		ts->get_pendown_state = tsc2007_get_pendown_state_dt;
> > 
> > and be done with it?
> >
> I also thought about that, but the existing function does not have any
> parameters, while the DT version of get_pendown_state() requires to get
> the GPIO passed to it somehow.

You can always have tsc2007_get_pendown_state_platform() wrapping the
call. Or we just go and fix board code.

Thanks.

-- 
Dmitry