On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 05:14:51PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 3:55 PM, Josh Cartwright <joshc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[..]
> > Okay, so maybe caching a pointer in the device isn't the best option,
> > what if we considered extending the platform_driver callbacks to include
> > a set of per-method (?) probe callbacks which do provide a handle to
> > matched identifiers.
> >
> > In the case of a totally contrived platform_driver supporting ACPI, OF,
> > and !OF configurations, it might look something like:
> >
> > static const struct of_device_id acme_of_table[] = {
> > /* ... */
> > { },
> > };
> > MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, acme_of_table);
> >
> > static int acme_probe_of(struct platform_device *pdev,
> > const struct of_device_id *id)
>
> I don't think this is the right direction. You might want to look at
> of_platform_driver in git history...
Thanks for the pointer, of_platform_driver was on it's way out the door
while I was still coming up to speed on devicetree.
To be clear, I'm not proposing that we reintroduce a new bus_type, or
duplicate driver instances, or anything that made of_platform_driver a
pain to deal with.
I'm only suggesting that we consider providing a set of interfaces that
1) provide a simpler/more convenient way for a driver to get at matched
id table entries, and 2) provide a clearer, declarative mechanism by
which a platform driver might isolate it's firmware-specific glue bits
from core driver logic.
Anyway, thanks for hearing me out!
Josh
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
