From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
To: andy.green@linaro.org
Cc: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org,
patches@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] PLATFORM: introduce structure to bind async platform data to a dev path name
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 21:45:26 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201103132145.26410.rjw@sisk.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4D7CFD11.5020604@linaro.org>
On Sunday, March 13, 2011, Andy Green wrote:
> On 03/13/2011 04:58 PM, Somebody in the thread at some point said:
>
> > So, you want to have a mechanism telling the driver "if the device
> > happens to have this particular path, use that platform data", right?
>
> Yeah.
>
> > And it works because the initialization code kind of knows what path the
> > device is going to be at, so it can predict that and provide the mathing data.
> >
> > Unfortunately, this relies on how device paths are constructed at the moment,
> > so if this approach is adopted in general, it will prevent us from changing
> > that way in the future (or at least it will make that very difficult).
> >
> > Perhaps you could use some other kind of device identification here?
>
> I'm sorry what prevents you changing paths in the future?
>
> Nothing does, if you change the bus tag from like usb1 to UsB_1 you just
> fix up the strings in the board definition files at the same time, they
> are sitting there in the same tree and
>
> grep platform_async_platform_data arch/* -R
>
> will show them all up in one hit. It's no different if you changed the
> name of a driver, you'd patch the board definition files with devices
> that need to bind to that driver name to uplevel them to the new name.
Well, I'm in the process of doing something similar with sysdevs and, trust me,
it is not fun. :-/
> The board definition file for these SoC cases usually has access to a
> pointer to the host controller directly since it instantiates them, if
> this was the only stumbling point and you thought it helped something
> the matching system can look for that particular pointer being a parent
> of the candidate probed device.
I think that would have been better than matching based on device paths.
Whether or not it's the only stumbling point depends on what other people
think.
Thanks,
Rafael
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-13 20:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-03-12 22:32 [RFC PATCH 0/4] PLATFORM: Support for async platform_data Andy Green
2011-03-12 22:32 ` [RFC PATCH 1/4] PLATFORM: introduce structure to bind async platform data to a dev path name Andy Green
2011-03-12 23:29 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-03-12 23:39 ` Andy Green
2011-03-13 1:03 ` Greg KH
2011-03-13 11:22 ` Andy Green
2011-03-13 12:51 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-03-13 13:53 ` Andy Green
2011-03-13 16:58 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-03-13 17:21 ` Andy Green
2011-03-13 20:45 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2011-03-13 16:14 ` Greg KH
2011-03-13 17:26 ` Andy Green
2011-03-12 22:32 ` [RFC PATCH 2/4] PLATFORM: Introduce registration function for async platform data maps Andy Green
2011-03-12 22:32 ` [RFC PATCH 3/4] PLATFORM: Introduce async platform_data attach api Andy Green
2011-03-13 1:01 ` Greg KH
2011-03-13 10:41 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-03-13 11:58 ` Andy Green
2011-03-13 12:53 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-03-13 13:21 ` Andy Green
2011-03-13 16:15 ` Greg KH
2011-03-13 17:13 ` Andy Green
2011-03-13 17:48 ` Greg KH
2011-03-13 18:13 ` Andy Green
2011-03-13 23:26 ` Greg KH
2011-03-14 8:38 ` Andy Green
2011-03-14 20:54 ` Greg KH
2011-03-14 21:03 ` Alan Stern
2011-03-14 21:13 ` Greg KH
2011-03-14 21:10 ` Mark Brown
2011-03-14 21:59 ` Andy Green
2011-03-12 22:32 ` [RFC PATCH 4/4] PLATFORM: Add some documentation to platform docs about async platform_data Andy Green
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=201103132145.26410.rjw@sisk.pl \
--to=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=andy.green@linaro.org \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=patches@linaro.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