Hi Yaniv,
2015-06-03 18:37 GMT+09:00 Yaniv Gardi <ygardi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> @@ -321,7 +313,22 @@ static int ufshcd_pltfrm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> goto out;
> }
>
> - hba->vops = get_variant_ops(&pdev->dev);
> + err = of_platform_populate(node, NULL, NULL, &pdev->dev);
> + if (err)
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev,
> + "%s: of_platform_populate() failed\n", __func__);
> +
> + ufs_variant_node = of_get_next_available_child(node, NULL);
> +
> + if (!ufs_variant_node) {
> + dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "failed to find ufs_variant_node child\n");
> + } else {
> + ufs_variant_pdev = of_find_device_by_node(ufs_variant_node);
> +
> + if (ufs_variant_pdev)
> + hba->vops = (struct ufs_hba_variant_ops *)
> + dev_get_drvdata(&ufs_variant_pdev->dev);
> + }
I have no strong objection to 'ufs_variant' sub-node. But why can't we
simply add an of_device_id to ufs_of_match, like below:
static const struct of_device_id ufs_of_match[] = {
{ .compatible = "jedec,ufs-1.1"},
#if IS_ENABLED(SCSI_UFS_QCOM)
{ .compatible = "qcom,ufs", .data = &ufs_hba_qcom_vops },
#neidf
{},
};
and get hba->vops by get_variant_ops()?
There is something similar in
drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/fsl_pq_mdio.c
--
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
