lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2024]   [Apr]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: (subset) [PATCH v2 0/9] spi: pxa2xx: Drop linux/spi/pxa2xx_spi.h
On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 04:39:13PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 02:29:38PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 02:07:29PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >
> > > Do I need to do anything else to get the rest applied?
> >
> > All the concerns I have with swnodes just being a more complex and less
> > maintainable way of doing things still stand, I'm not clear that this is
> > making anything better.
>
> As I explained before it's not less maintainable than device tree sources.
> The only difference is that we don't have validation tool for in-kernel
> tables. And I don't see why we need that. The data describes the platforms
> and in the very same way may come to the driver from elsewhere.
> How would you validate that? It the same as we trust firmware (boot loader)
> or not. If we don't than how should we do at all?
>
> Can you point out what the exact aspect is most significant from C language
> perspective that we miss after conversion? Type checking? Something else?

Also note, after hiding the data structures from that file we open
the door for the much bigger cleanup, and I have patches already precooked
(need a bit of time to test, though).

--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2024-05-27 16:22    [W:0.064 / U:0.084 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site