On Tue, 2012-05-15 at 16:11 +0200, Samuel Iglesias Gonsálvez wrote: [snip] > > A third option is use bus devices like VME bridges in the vme bus > driver, i.e, they are not devices, just an abstraction that provides > some functionality to the mezzanine devices. > > I prefer the first option because it reuses the code of the probe/match > functions inside the ipack bus driver and it shows the hierarchy through > sysfs as everything is a registered device. > > What do you think? Thinking again about it, I think I don't win anything interesting registering a new device in case of an ipack bus device. It is just needed to establish the parent of the ipack device to the "real" device of the bus (i.e, the PCI, USB device...), like the aforementioned VME bridge in the drivers/staging/vme driver. So, I will rewrite the patch keeping it simple: maintaining the change in ipack_device_release function and ipack_device_register with some little modifications. This is actually the important stuff. And delaying the change in ipack_bus_register to whenever it is really necessary, if it is. Sorry for the inconveniences, Sam
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
