[RFC PATCH 1/3] ARM: imx: cpuidle: Convert imx5 driver to platform driver

[daniel.lezcano@linaro.org (Daniel Lezcano)]

On 11/07/2013 08:56 AM, Shawn Guo wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 09:49:31AM -0700, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> @@ -149,6 +149,13 @@ static void imx5_pm_idle(void)
>>   	imx5_cpu_do_idle();
>>   }
>>
>> +static struct platform_device imx5_cpuidle_pdev = {
>> +	.name = "cpuidle-imx5",
>> +	.dev = {
>> +		.platform_data = imx5_pm_idle,
>
> This is a little bit hackish and less future proof.  We should probably
> create a data structure with the function hook as a field in it.

Yeah, I agree that is what I was planning for the near future as soon as 
the driver is moved into the drivers/cpuidle directory. As the other 
drivers are following the same scheme I want to define a common ops 
structure to be shared across the different driver. But I need to have 
several drivers in the same place in order to define the different idle 
callback.

Is it acceptable we keep this for the moment as the other cpuidle driver 
like cpuidle-at91 and then consolidate with a structure with an 
additional patchset addressing several drivers at once ?

>> +	},
>> +};
>> +
>>   static int __init imx5_pm_common_init(void)
>>   {
>>   	int ret;
>> @@ -166,7 +173,7 @@ static int __init imx5_pm_common_init(void)
>>   	/* Set the registers to the default cpu idle state. */
>>   	mx5_cpu_lp_set(IMX5_DEFAULT_CPU_IDLE_STATE);
>>
>> -	return imx5_cpuidle_init();
>> +	return platform_device_register(&imx5_cpuidle_pdev);
>>   }
>>
>>   void __init imx5_pm_init(void)
>> --
>> 1.7.9.5
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
>> linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org
>> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
>


-- 
  <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog