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: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 13:31:55 +0100 Message-ID: <20110928123154.GG3279@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <20110921131637.GF4374@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <20110927150555.GF20588@ponder.secretlab.ca> <20110927181420.GQ4289@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <20110927182636.GR4289@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <20110927183832.GS4289@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE 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 Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 10:07:43AM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote: > On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 7:38 PM, Mark Brown > > You're modifying global data which should really be const and is sh= ared > > between multiple devices in place. =A0Probably you'll not notice an= y > > practical effects, especially if you don't happen to have multiple > > devices in the same system. > I see. In this case, it would be impossible to have two VX855s in the > same system, and if you did, you would have bigger problems. In this > context what we're doing is safe. Right, but your modification was to the MFD core so it's going to affec= t other devices...