From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: viresh.kumar@st.com (viresh kumar) Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2010 14:05:14 +0530 Subject: [PATCH 15/74] ST SPEAr: adding support for rtc In-Reply-To: <20100906224516.GB8153@game.jcrosoft.org> References: <20100906224516.GB8153@game.jcrosoft.org> Message-ID: <4C85F942.2080200@st.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 9/7/2010 4:15 AM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: >> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-spear13xx/include/mach/generic.h b/arch/arm/mach-spear13xx/include/mach/generic.h >> > index 41c1a53..dc80421 100644 >> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-spear13xx/include/mach/generic.h >> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-spear13xx/include/mach/generic.h >> > @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@ >> > >> > /* Add spear13xx family device structure declarations here */ >> > extern struct amba_device uart_device; >> > +extern struct platform_device rtc_device; > no need to export all theres platform devices > > it will be better to export funtion as done on AT91 > > to register the device > > as > > spear_rtc_device_add(); > > and the sme for the other devices etc... We don't want to create unnecessary abstraction. Even if we add functions then these function prototypes have to be added in generic.h. This will increase lines of code, without much advantages. > > btw you do not respect the kernel coding style please check your patches Sorry!! But we have been following coding style, have run checkpatch too... Can you please pin point where are we wrong, so that we don't commit same mistakes again next time. regards, viresh.