From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lee Jones Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 2/2] mfd: stmpe: Update DT support in stmpe driver Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 10:35:15 +0000 Message-ID: <20121206103515.GQ2718@gmail.com> References: <121653def4e985b0c1b59045637dd4518f97e73a.1354199865.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org> <20121130105731.GN3176@sortiz-mobl> <20121130154542.GG23648@gmail.com> <20121205224203.691153E0E22@localhost> <20121206095019.GN2718@gmail.com> <20121206101131.GP2718@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Viresh Kumar Cc: Grant Likely , Samuel Ortiz , rabin.vincent@stericsson.com, shiraz.hashim@st.com, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, spear-devel@list.st.com, linus.walleij@linaro.org, Vipul Kumar Samar List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 06 Dec 2012, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 6 December 2012 15:41, Lee Jones wrote: > > So then I'm back to my original question, why? > > > > What is it used for? What difference does it make? > > > > I could understand if the .data attribute was used in the driver > > to make vital decisions based on STMPE version, but it's not. So > > why are we burdening the driver with unused code that's not > > required? Other than to get your mainlined patch-count up of > > course? This has an air of "placing header files in alphabetical > > order" about it. ;) >=20 > The count would still be the same as some part of this patch will > go :) >=20 > I said that because of Grant's comment: "An of_match_table is the > robust way of identifying specific devices and allows for matching > against any entry in the compatible list." >=20 > So, thought its better we keep it. Only if you're going to use it, or else it's just unused cruft. > Now, the problem is, with this new table we will bind device and > driver based on of_device_id table and probe it using device_id > table. Ahh.. that's broken. Maybe yes, can remove it unless we > have a real need of it. Broken or otherwise, if it's unused, it's cruft. :) > >> By chance > >> our non-DT and DT tables had a difference of "st," only in the nam= e > >> of instances and so it worked without tables. Otherwise it couldn'= t > >> have worked. > >> > >> Over that, i am looking to bring the "stmpe,id" binding back again= (unless > >> you have a better option), as device name is not coming from DT cu= rrently, > >> which we discussed earlier. > > > > Or you could not put unnecessary bindings into the Device Tree > > by putting two and two together and realise that using the table > > is the correct thing to do instead. This actually gives reason > > to you previous patch, but should probably be fixed-up into it > > so it has some proper meaning/purpose. ;) >=20 > Couldn't understand this one :( Really? Let's break it down - what do you need "stmpe,id" for? --=20 Lee Jones Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead Linaro.org =E2=94=82 Open source software for ARM SoCs =46ollow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog