On Friday, October 17, 2014 08:04:52 PM Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On October 17, 2014 2:01:33 PM CEST, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >Hi Everyone, > > > >Hving had a couple of chats with Grant and Arnd during LinuxCon EU/LPC, > >we > >now have version 5 taking all feedback into account (hopefully). > > Awesome, that was really fast. I'm currently on my way his me in > the train, replying from my phone, but it looks good now. I'll have a more > detailed look next week but I'm definitely happy to see this go in (to next > and 3.19) now, any details we still find can be fixed on top. > > > In > >short, if > >we are passed a struct fwnode_handle pointer, we can get from it to the > >appropriate device node pointer (either struct acpi_device or struct > >device_node) > >using container_of() after we've checked the type. This is needed for > >the code > >that needs to access child nodes of a device in case when they don't > >have > >struct device representations (whatever the reason). This has been > >suggested > >by Grant and pretty much everyone involved agrees that it's better that > >the > >alternatives presented so far. > > Yes, it's nice enough that I now take back all the objections I had for the > child accessory API. Cool, thanks! I've just refreshed the device-properties branch of the linux-pm.git tree and it contains the current material now (including a couple of build fixes reported by the autobuild robot in patches [02/12] and [09/12]). My plan is to merge this into the linux-next branch when 3.18-rc1 is out. Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
