[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:0.019 / U:180.356 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site