On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 02:11:48PM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > > We can share the RFC in case you are interested in looking at code flow > > using the of_dynamic approach. > > Please no more abuse of the platform device. Last time this came up there was some disagreement from the ARM folks, they were not keen on having xx_drivers added all over the place to support the same OF/DT devices just discovered in a different way. It is why ACPI is mapped to platform_device even in some cases. I think if you push them down this path they will get resistance to get the needed additional xx_drivers into the needed places. > If your device can be discovered by scanning a bus, it is not a platform > device. A DT fragment loaded during boot binds a driver using a platform_driver, why should a DT fragment loaded post-boot bind using an XX_driver and further why should the CDX way of getting the DT raise to such importantance that it gets its own cdx_driver ? In the end the driver does not care about how the DT was loaded. None of these things are on a discoverable bus in any sense like PCI or otherwise. They are devices described by a DT fragement and they take all their parameters from that chunk of DT. How the DT was loaded into the system is not a useful distinction that raises the level of needing an entire new set of xx_driver structs all over the tree, IMHO. Jason
