From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753158AbXIHNim (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Sep 2007 09:38:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751517AbXIHNif (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Sep 2007 09:38:35 -0400 Received: from mail.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:32929 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750866AbXIHNie (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Sep 2007 09:38:34 -0400 Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2007 06:30:36 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Jean Delvare Cc: LKML , David Brownell Subject: Re: Platform device id Message-ID: <20070908133036.GA32145@suse.de> References: <20070907153559.17faf9d1@hyperion.delvare> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070907153559.17faf9d1@hyperion.delvare> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Sep 07, 2007 at 03:35:59PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > Hi Greg, all, > > While platform_device.id is a u32, platform_device_add() handles "-1" as > a special id value. This has potential for confusion and bugs. One such > bug was reported to me by David Brownell: > > http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/i2c/2007-September/001787.html > > And since then I've found two other drivers affected (uartlite and > i2c-pxa). > > Could we at least make platform_device.id an int so as to clear up the > confusion? I doubt that the id will ever be a large number anyway. Sure, that's fine by me, feel free to send a patch. thanks, greg k-h