On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 12:19:41PM +0100, Liviu Dudau wrote: > On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 11:36:33AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 10:40:48AM +0100, Liviu Dudau wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 08:58:10AM +0100, Russell King wrote: > > > > Convert DT component matching to use component_match_add_release(). > > > > > > Hi Russell, > > > > > > Any reason for not keeping the component_match_add() calls in the drivers? > > > > Sorry, I don't understand your comment. > > As in: component_match_add() already exists as a macro that calls > component_match_add_release(), but with a NULL release function. If it > were to be changed to pass a default release_of() function then most of > the drivers would not have to change, right? It is just one point of > view and I was curious if there was a reason not to choose it, as it > would have (probably) generated a smaller delta? And what should the calls that don't pass a DT node be called? What happens to new users who aren't passing a DT node but use component_match_add() ? What you're suggesting sound totally insane to me: you're making the change a flag-day: component_match_add() currently takes anything as the data pointer and users can pass anything that their compare function can handle - and changing that to a function which can only take a device_node. That means all non-DT users of that function need to change at the same time. Flag days are really bad news in kernel development (or any distributed development project), and I won't generate a patch which causes a flag day to occur - especially not one which impacts a large number of users. -- RMK's Patch system: http://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.6Mbps down 400kbps up according to speedtest.net. _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
