From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: hdegoede@redhat.com (Hans de Goede)
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 11:51:11 +0100
Subject: [PATCH v5 07/14] ahci-platform: "Library-ise" ahci_probe
 functionality
In-Reply-To: <52E63778.5000509@ti.com>
References: <1390417489-5354-1-git-send-email-hdegoede@redhat.com>
 <1390417489-5354-8-git-send-email-hdegoede@redhat.com>
 <52E63778.5000509@ti.com>
Message-ID: <52E63A1F.6080301@redhat.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

Hi,

On 01/27/2014 11:39 AM, Roger Quadros wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 01/22/2014 09:04 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:

<snip>

>> --- a/include/linux/ahci_platform.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/ahci_platform.h
>> @@ -20,7 +20,13 @@
>>   struct device;
>>   struct ata_port_info;
>>   struct ahci_host_priv;
>> +struct platform_device;
>>
>> +/*
>> + * Note ahci_platform_data is deprecated. New drivers which need to override
>> + * any of these, should instead declare there own platform_driver struct, and
>> + * use ahci_platform* functions in their own probe, suspend and resume methods.
>> + */
>>   struct ahci_platform_data {
>>   	int (*init)(struct device *dev, struct ahci_host_priv *hpriv);
>>   	void (*exit)(struct device *dev);
>> @@ -35,5 +41,13 @@ int ahci_platform_enable_clks(struct ahci_host_priv *hpriv);
>>   void ahci_platform_disable_clks(struct ahci_host_priv *hpriv);
>>   int ahci_platform_enable_resources(struct ahci_host_priv *hpriv);
>>   void ahci_platform_disable_resources(struct ahci_host_priv *hpriv);
>> +struct ahci_host_priv *ahci_platform_get_resources(
>> +	struct platform_device *pdev);
>
> Why not use 'struct device' as the argument?

Because of calls to platform_get_resource inside the function.

>> +void ahci_platform_put_resources(struct ahci_host_priv *hpriv);
>
> Can we have 'struct device' as the argument? Else it becomes
> impossible to get 'struct device' from 'hpriv' if we need to call e.g.
> pm_runtime_*() APIs.

The plan for is for this function to go away once we have a
devm version of of_clk_get, so if you need to put pm_runtime_calls
somewhere, please don't put them here. This sounds like something which
should go in enable / disable resources instead ?

Regards,

Hans