From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Ferre Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/8] i2c: at91: use an id table for SoC dependent parameters Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2012 16:51:44 +0200 Message-ID: <5040CF80.8060201@atmel.com> References: <1346404884-18451-1-git-send-email-ludovic.desroches@atmel.com> <1346404884-18451-4-git-send-email-ludovic.desroches@atmel.com> <20120831142944.GA23867@game.jcrosoft.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20120831142944.GA23867-RQcB7r2h9QmfDR2tN2SG5Ni2O/JbrIOy@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-i2c-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD , ludovic.desroches-AIFe0yeh4nAAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org Cc: linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org, n.voss-+umVssTZoCsb1SvskN2V4Q@public.gmane.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 08/31/2012 04:29 PM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD : > On 11:21 Fri 31 Aug , ludovic.desroches-AIFe0yeh4nAAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org wrote: >> From: Ludovic Desroches >> >> Use the id_table to store configuration structures which are depending on >> SoC. >> >> Signed-off-by: Ludovic Desroches >> --- >> arch/arm/mach-at91/at91rm9200.c | 2 +- >> arch/arm/mach-at91/at91rm9200_devices.c | 11 +---- >> arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260.c | 3 +- >> arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c | 8 ++- >> arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9261.c | 3 +- >> arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9261_devices.c | 17 +++---- >> arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263.c | 2 +- >> arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9263_devices.c | 2 +- >> arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9g45.c | 4 +- >> arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9g45_devices.c | 4 +- >> arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9rl.c | 4 +- >> arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9rl_devices.c | 2 +- >> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c | 85 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------- >> 13 files changed, 95 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91rm9200.c b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91rm9200.c >> index f2112f9..0bc91e5 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91rm9200.c >> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91rm9200.c >> @@ -187,7 +187,7 @@ static struct clk_lookup periph_clocks_lookups[] = { >> CLKDEV_CON_DEV_ID("pclk", "ssc.0", &ssc0_clk), >> CLKDEV_CON_DEV_ID("pclk", "ssc.1", &ssc1_clk), >> CLKDEV_CON_DEV_ID("pclk", "ssc.2", &ssc2_clk), >> - CLKDEV_CON_DEV_ID(NULL, "at91_i2c", &twi_clk), >> + CLKDEV_CON_DEV_ID(NULL, "at91rm9200_i2c", &twi_clk), > use i2c-xxx as on other drivers > > and I do not like to have platform_device_id Me, I like it and find this implementation very elegant. > as we need to touch the driver to add a new soc So what? We still keep the compatibility if the new SoC has it compatibility assured with previous revision: there is nothing to modify. > please use platform data No, it does not have to be exposed to the user: these data are highly dependent on the actual hardware (IP revision in fact). So, no need to mess with platform data. So I will acknowledge Ludo's patches. Bye, -- Nicolas Ferre