From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mfd: allow mfd_cell association with device tree node Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 19:14:20 +0100 Message-ID: <20110927181420.GQ4289@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <20110921120148.4A81E9D401D@zog.reactivated.net> <20110921124936.GA25620@sirena.org.uk> <20110921131637.GF4374@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <20110927150555.GF20588@ponder.secretlab.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Daniel Drake Cc: Grant Likely , sameo@linux.intel.com, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dilinger@queued.net List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 05:44:04PM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote: > However, it does take Mark's suggestion into account that the mfd > should have some clear representation in the device tree. For us it > already did have (naturally), but this wasn't reflected in my earlier > patch. It is now - the location of the vx855-gpio node is based on > finding the mfd node and going from there. Why not just kmemdup() the template you're using rather than modifying it in place?