From: Grant Likely <grant.likely-s3s/WqlpOiPyB63q8FvJNQ@public.gmane.org>
To: devicetree-discuss
<devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org>,
David Miller <davem-fT/PcQaiUtIeIZ0/mPfg9Q@public.gmane.org>,
sparclinux-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
Cc: Jeremy Kerr <jeremy.kerr-Z7WLFzj8eWMS+FvcfC7Uqw@public.gmane.org>,
Michal Simek
<michal.simek-g5w7nrANp4BDPfheJLI6IQ@public.gmane.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr-3FnU+UHB4dNDw9hX6IcOSA@public.gmane.org>
Subject: RFC: of_platform and platform bus merge
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 10:52:47 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <fa686aa41003180952q547ab888kff72a4f0bf258677@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
Hi Dave,
I need your opinion on the of_platform bus. For powerpc, microblaze,
and all others I intend to merge the current of_platform_bus_type with
platform_bus_type. powerpc and microblaze basically use of_platform
bus as if it were the platform bus, so this is an easy decision to
make. As I mentioned, I've already written a patch that makes
of_device and platform_device the same structure. I also think I have
a way to adapt the of_platform_driver registration to make existing
of_platform_drivers register on the platform bus without any driver
changes, and preserving the existing OF-style match behaviour
(basically by moving the of_match_table into struct device_driver when
CONFIG_OF is set; I've got a patch that does this too), and preserving
the existing device hierarchy.
However, I know that sparc uses a different model in that every node
in a sparc device tree gets registered on the of_platform_bus, not
just the things that would be analogous to 'platform' devices.
Therefore, the merging of_platform_bus_type and platform_bus_type, and
the inherent co-mingling of device drivers for both buses, has a
higher likelyhood of causing problems on sparc than it does on powerpc
or microblaze.
I see two possible ways to proceed.
1. Split of_platform code so that sparc preserves the old behaviour,
while powerpc, mb, arm, etc. go ahead with the of_platform bus merge.
ie. when building sparc, of_platform_drivers will get registered on
the of_platform_bus_type as they currently do. When building
everything else, of_platform_driver registration will use an adapter
shim to register of_platform_drivers onto the platform bus. Non-sparc
of_platform_drivers will slowly get migrated to normal platform
drivers, and eventually the of_platform_bus APIs will be a
sparc-specific thing.
2. Merge of_platform_bus_type with platform_bus on sparc too.
I'm happy to take either path, so I need to know your opinion on the
of_platform/platform bus merger. I will of course do all the sparc
compile testing on any changes that I make, but I'll need help making
sure I don't break things at runtime.
Thanks,
g.
--
Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng.
Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.
next reply other threads:[~2010-03-18 16:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-18 16:52 Grant Likely [this message]
2010-03-19 0:32 ` RFC: of_platform and platform bus merge David Miller
2010-03-19 4:24 ` Grant Likely
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=fa686aa41003180952q547ab888kff72a4f0bf258677@mail.gmail.com \
--to=grant.likely-s3s/wqlpoipyb63q8fvjnq@public.gmane.org \
--cc=davem-fT/PcQaiUtIeIZ0/mPfg9Q@public.gmane.org \
--cc=devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org \
--cc=jeremy.kerr-Z7WLFzj8eWMS+FvcfC7Uqw@public.gmane.org \
--cc=michal.simek-g5w7nrANp4BDPfheJLI6IQ@public.gmane.org \
--cc=sfr-3FnU+UHB4dNDw9hX6IcOSA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=sparclinux-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox