On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 3:15 PM, Eva Rachel Retuya <eraretuya@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, May 01, 2017 at 02:31:00PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> [...]
>> > -int adxl345_core_probe(struct device *dev, struct regmap *regmap,
>> > +int adxl345_core_probe(struct device *dev, struct regmap *regmap, int irq,
>> > const char *name);
>>
>> I think I commented this once. Instead of increasing parameters,
>> please introduce a new struct (as separate preparatory patch) which
>> will hold current parameters. Let's call it
>> strut adxl345_chip {
>> struct device *dev;
>> struct regmap *regmap;
>> const char *name;
>> };
>>
>> I insisnt in this chage.
>
> I'm not sure if what you want is more simpler, is it something like what
> this driver does?
Nope. The driver you were referring to does the same you did.
I'm proposing the above struct to be introduced along with changing
prototype like:
-int adxl345_core_probe(struct device *dev, struct regmap *regmap,
const char *name);
+int adxl345_core_probe(struct adxl345_chip *chip);
In next patch adding interrupt would not touch prototypes at all!
>
> http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/drivers/iio/gyro/mpu3050.h#L41
> http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/drivers/iio/gyro/mpu3050-i2c.c#L34
>> > +#include <linux/of_irq.h>
>>
>> Can we get rid of gnostic resource providers?
>>
>
> I'm uninformed and still learning. Please let me know how to approach
> this in some other way.
I suppose something like platform_get_irq(); to use.
But it would be nice to you to investigate more.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
