From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: grinberg@compulab.co.il (Igor Grinberg) Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 14:25:50 +0300 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: pxa: fix build failure for regulator consumer in em-x270.c In-Reply-To: <4F7477CB.5070206@windriver.com> References: <1331244366-6147-1-git-send-email-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> <4F732C97.2030804@compulab.co.il> <20120328152743.GW3232@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <4F73356D.5080401@windriver.com> <20120328161305.GZ3232@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <4F73437B.6070806@windriver.com> <4F7471A0.6070208@compulab.co.il> <4F7477CB.5070206@windriver.com> Message-ID: <4F75983E.8070109@compulab.co.il> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 03/29/12 16:55, Paul Gortmaker wrote: > On 12-03-29 10:28 AM, Igor Grinberg wrote: >> On 03/28/12 18:59, Paul Gortmaker wrote: >>> On 12-03-28 12:13 PM, Mark Brown wrote: >>>> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 11:59:41AM -0400, Paul Gortmaker wrote: >>>>> On 12-03-28 11:27 AM, Mark Brown wrote: >>>> >>>>> static struct platform_device em_x270_gps_userspace_consumer = { >>>>> .name = "reg-userspace-consumer", >>>>> .id = 0, >>>> >>>>> static struct platform_device em_x270_gprs_userspace_consumer = { >>>>> .name = "reg-userspace-consumer", >>>>> .id = 1, >>>> >>>>> Note that the existing names currently don't incorporate the .id >>>>> field as a suffix, and so never were unique. >>>> >>>> No, this is just a basic part of how platform devices work - the device >>>> name is always the same and if you've got more than one of them they get >>>> different .ids. dev_name() returns name.id, or just name if id is set >>>> to -1 indicating that there's onyl one device of a given type. >>> >>> OK, so Igor - can you simply retest the v2 patch, but make the >>> two trivial changes: >>> >>> -REGULATOR_CONSUMER(ldo3, "reg-userspace-consumer", "vcc gps"); >>> +REGULATOR_CONSUMER(ldo3, "reg-userspace-consumer.0", "vcc gps"); >>> >>> -REGULATOR_CONSUMER(ldo19, "reg-userspace-consumer", "vcc gprs"); >>> +REGULATOR_CONSUMER(ldo19, "reg-userspace-consumer.1", "vcc gprs"); >> >> Well, I thought of this solution, but I don't like it, as it makes >> the whole thing very fragile and sensitive to the reg-userspace-consumer >> platform device registration order and count, isn't it? > > Why would it be order dependent? You can see in the above structs > that they explicitly call out an ID value -- it is _not_ chosen at > the time of registration. So it will always be: > > reg-userspace-consumer.0 --> gps consumer > reg-userspace-consumer.1 --> gprs consumer > > At least that is my (limited) understanding, based on what > Mark was saying. The problem is, that someone has to stop sending emails in a hurry... Spitting all the mix in the head when in rush... and that would be me... Sorry, for the mess, I'll try to fix myself up... -- Regards, Igor.