Re: [PATCH 0/5] mfd: replace IORESOURCE_IO by IORESOURCE_MEM

Geert Uytterhoeven
2012-08-07T15:22:48Z

On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 1:51 PM, Russell King <rmk@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> How can:
>
> #define IORESOURCE_FOO 0x00000300
>
> in ioport.h be called "invasive" ? The best chance of error is that the
> identifier is already in use. So learn to use grep to check the whole
> sodding tree first to make sure that the identifier you're choosing to
> use isn't already in use somewhere.

Perhaps it's not invasive enough? :-)
Don't you need an extra file in /proc, too (cfr. /proc/ioports and /proc/iomem)?

And as Arnd pointed out, if resources will be used for various new buses,
"IORESOURCE_FOO" or "IORESOURCE_OTHER" is a bit vague.
What about conflicts where one driver means i2c addresses and another
one means gpio addresses? The resource system will reject them?

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds