[lkml]   [2007]   [Sep]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectPlatform device id
Hi Greg, all,

While 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:

And since then I've found two other drivers affected (uartlite and

Could we at least make an int so as to clear up the
confusion? I doubt that the id will ever be a large number anyway.

To go one step further, I am questioning the real value of this naming
exception for these "unique" platform devices. On top of the bugs I
mentioned above, it has potential for compatibility breakage: adding a
second device of the same type will rename the first one from "foo" to
"foo.0". It also requires specific checks in many individual platform
drivers. All this, as I understand it, for a purely aesthetic reason. I
don't think this is worth it. Would there be any objection to simply
getting rid of this exception and having all platform devices named

Jean Delvare
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2007-09-07 15:37    [W:0.091 / U:7.980 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site