From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A63EC2BA2B for ; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 21:35:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22E82206D5 for ; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 21:35:40 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1587072940; bh=EiJsw6jJYI2Q7cRp5f5BaDzej34SLwUj9rq17eiaYp4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=J6tIjSVBfjmX5SP7j/KgaqeARcNqn15Vtq7jQGlI1SkKdnFW37rSlGulrrRGBtpuW gpHBT5AHlmiMeP5m5CoSk9TEiEprdWXsNL3i6zhsMxBfC5W0ffVUcXV2Z0aJ+xwCiW sVR2LQgNq+TASox+RTQ3/O4/2kaA5HhNu6lcXOds= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728143AbgDPVfj (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Apr 2020 17:35:39 -0400 Received: from mail-oi1-f193.google.com ([209.85.167.193]:40604 "EHLO mail-oi1-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726049AbgDPVfi (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Apr 2020 17:35:38 -0400 Received: by mail-oi1-f193.google.com with SMTP id t199so280711oif.7 for ; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:35:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=tWpSGNBaMFU18t4G42eRf7uq/0lzKZgYkGx4emWEElE=; b=d7LzzVb7CUXUt3GsKldUvJ5iIlUb4vEWGm/dXrnJrf7ub1c8BMwy17U1qKe6pPiiJ3 DTtoxxAzUPmbuZlrL3eerCMFNc8c+JvvvcpO46fni75xMp3MndUtwjVWaRmb63lfe7qx hL3mz9D/ooRSVNWq3kh8JavPiBaQ855WcFFAJJBYlSiGgZmq3YMUSCCBb3Rn6RAa+joZ uycAJj0Lbhn24vHTNqRTStVy6S3IAZcmZrLfJMuUrWYCFCL/MhuSzzjD576ZrBU5TOlD zAdfSND9hbzpYF3NfO38EUPVAJCxJhjJ/VFDTVnrQWSAwLINbBsKGHisJhY4zR1i/VC5 y3pQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuZTtxmXey442HmJsmCQBrU9raxE4EKpk/Iuo7ooEDtH40yUX6AA oArjpJs6tikwZ5Pt6XvcacFZYEc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypKwYD7vKsXxEYld0OsFN+djRcK121t4H9hMJPGsYoVvteuXNznqBneMLgwV2X7+/OOLNhe9gQ== X-Received: by 2002:aca:c385:: with SMTP id t127mr112809oif.49.1587072937377; Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:35:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rob-hp-laptop (24-155-109-49.dyn.grandenetworks.net. [24.155.109.49]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a131sm7440469oii.30.2020.04.16.14.35.36 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:35:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: (nullmailer pid 7336 invoked by uid 1000); Thu, 16 Apr 2020 21:35:35 -0000 Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2020 16:35:35 -0500 From: Rob Herring To: Scott Wood Cc: Wang Wenhu , gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, christophe.leroy@c-s.fr, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, kernel@vivo.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v4,4/4] drivers: uio: new driver for fsl_85xx_cache_sram Message-ID: <20200416213535.GA2511@bogus> References: <20200416153537.23736-1-wenhu.wang@vivo.com> <20200416153537.23736-5-wenhu.wang@vivo.com> <16f8fa2d26d88f22ed05e9870709c2fd5c3960cf.camel@buserror.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <16f8fa2d26d88f22ed05e9870709c2fd5c3960cf.camel@buserror.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 02:59:36PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote: > On Thu, 2020-04-16 at 08:35 -0700, Wang Wenhu wrote: > > +#define UIO_INFO_VER "devicetree,pseudo" > > What does this mean? Changing a number into a non-obvious string (Why > "pseudo"? Why does the UIO user care that the config came from the device > tree?) just to avoid setting off Greg's version number autoresponse isn't > really helping anything. > > > +static const struct of_device_id uio_mpc85xx_l2ctlr_of_match[] = { > > + { .compatible = "uio,mpc85xx-cache-sram", }, Form is , and "uio" is not a vendor (and never will be). > > + {}, > > +}; > > + > > +static struct platform_driver uio_fsl_85xx_cache_sram = { > > + .probe = uio_fsl_85xx_cache_sram_probe, > > + .remove = uio_fsl_85xx_cache_sram_remove, > > + .driver = { > > + .name = DRIVER_NAME, > > + .owner = THIS_MODULE, > > + .of_match_table = uio_mpc85xx_l2ctlr_of_match, > > + }, > > +}; > > Greg's comment notwithstanding, I really don't think this belongs in the > device tree (and if I do get overruled on that point, it at least needs a > binding document). Let me try to come up with a patch for dynamic allocation. Agreed. "UIO" bindings have long been rejected. Rob