lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Jul]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/1] mfd: Fix runtime warning caused by duplicate device registration
    On 05/07/12 14:20, Mark Brown wrote:
    > On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 02:12:09PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
    >> On 05/07/12 14:03, Mark Brown wrote:
    >>> On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 01:55:50PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
    >
    >>>> Then were would you register it, if not here?
    >
    >>> Same place as for DT.
    >
    >> That is a possibility, but the idea is to reduce code in the
    >> platform area, not add to it. We'd also need a completely separate
    >
    > But surely this would, if anything, remove code? You already have the
    > code to do the registration in the MFD so all you're going to be doing
    > here is removing the code from

    No, it will add platform code if we were to register the ab8500 from the
    platform area.

    >> platform_data structure to the one we use for platform registration,
    >> as much of it has now been moved into Device Tree. The regulators
    >> are a good example of this, but there's also GPIO information which
    >> is no longer relevant etc.
    >
    > Hrm, the usual pattern for this stuff is that the DT is parsed into
    > platform data so the DT code is isolated to the parser. It sounds like
    > you've got a very different structure here?

    Yes we do. Ref that commit ID I sent you you a few days ago:

    5f3fc8adeec9bb12742fbfa777fa1947deda21a2

    >> I do believe that registering the AB8500 from the DB8500 is
    >> appropriate though, for the simple reason that the AB8500 is a
    >> sub-device to the DB8500. I think this is the correct thing to do.
    >> But anyway, as I said before, that ship has sailed. We _already_ do
    >> this. All this patch does is prevent the AB8500 from being
    >> registered twice when DT is not enabled.
    >
    > Well, it also introduces code into mainline which is likely to be used
    > as a template by other people - I'd be especially worried about the next
    > ST platform ending up repeating the same mistakes.

    There are no mistakes. It would work for other platforms. :)

    > If the code is so
    > separate perhaps it's better to just remove the non-DT support?

    That's the plan.

    --
    Lee Jones
    Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
    M: +44 77 88 633 515
    Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
    Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog


    --
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2012-07-05 16:41    [W:4.247 / U:0.248 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site