Hi Stephen,
On Fri, Nov 9, 2018 at 5:59 PM Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Quoting Geert Uytterhoeven (2018-11-09 01:56:01)
> > On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 7:37 PM Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > Quoting Rob Herring (2018-11-06 12:44:52)
> > > > On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 12:36 PM Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > int (*probe)(struct platform_device *pdev);
> > > };
> > >
> > > struct of_platform_driver_probe_func mtk_probes[] = {
> > > mtk_probe1,
> > > mtk_probe2,
> > > mtk_probe3,
> > > };
> > >
> > > struct platform_driver mtk_driver = {
> > > .of_probes = &mtk_probes;
> > > .driver = {
> > > .name = "mtk-foo";
> > > .of_match_table = mtk_match_table,
> > > },
> > > };
> >
> > This looks worse to me: people tend to be very good at keeping multiple
> > arrays in sync :-(
>
> To be _not_ very good? Agreed, and so specifying the probe function as
> another member in struct of_device_id seems to be the way to go.
Correct, sometimes sarcasm doesn't arrive well at the other end of the
electronic tunnel...
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
