* Mark Brown | 2008-04-24 15:57:52 [+0100]: >On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 04:04:59PM +0200, Sebastian Siewior wrote: > >> I've sent a RFC to the alsa mailing list [1] about adding an extra field in >> order to pass the IRQ from the AC97 driver to the ucb1400 driver. The >> result was: > >> Now I'm curious what solution the people here prefer: >> - adding a private field [1] (my favorite) > >As I indicated in reply to your initial RFC any such private field >ought to be a void * in order to allow other information to be passed >through to drivers. I got that. >Note that this will also need changes in all the relevant AC97 drivers >to support getting the private data from platform/machine definition >code to the relevant driver using whatever methods are appropriate for >the platform. Sure. I haven't found any driver that needs any extra information. For instance a board that uses ucb1400_ts and gets the interrupt via auto probing can't be auto converted due to -ENOCLUE. Therefore the ucb1400 driver acts like before if the private field is NULL. >> - hacking up the ucb1400 [2] (doesn't solve [3] and needs addition code >> to solve [4]). > >[3] is the issue with the WM97xx touchscreen drivers. That's currently >solved by exactly this issue - as far as I can see from the patch you >cite you're using OpenFirmware. In that case isn't modifying the driver >to query OpenFirmware an idiomatic solution anyway (though it still >leaves other platforms in the lurch)? Not really. I have to parse the whole device tree and pick one single value. This isn't done by any other driver as far as I can see and it equals a global variable. My device tree currently looks like the following: | ac97@f0000400 { | compatible = "fpga-ac97"; | reg = <f0000400 100>; | interrupts = <5 1>; | interrupt-parent = <&mpic>; | ucb1400@ac97 { | compatible = "Phillips,ucb1400_ts" | interrupts = <9 0>; | interrupt-parent = <&mpic>; | } | }; Now, while I get auto probed for my device (fpga-ac97) I grab and setup the IRQ for the ucb1400_ts device and pass the IRQ-number in the ac97 struct. If you have a platform driver you can still do something like: |static struct resource smc91x_resources[] = { | { | .start = 0x20200300, | .end = 0x20200300 + 16, | .flags = IORESOURCE_MEM, | }, { | .start = IRQ_PF0, | .end = IRQ_PF0, | .flags = IORESOURCE_IRQ | IORESOURCE_IRQ_HIGHLEVEL, | }, |}; |static struct platform_device smc91x_device = { | .name = "smc91x", | .id = 0, | .num_resources = ARRAY_SIZE(smc91x_resources), | .resource = smc91x_resources, |}; and add another IORESOURCE_IRQ field with holds the interrupt number for your ac97 device (in case of ucb1400_ts or some other thing for a total different driver). The ucb1400_ts driver itself does not care anymore because it is getting this information from the ac97 struct. >> - something totally different what did not come to my attention yet. > >Something that worked for more than just AC97 would be nice - a method >for getting platform data to drivers for devices on buses that are >normally autoprobed. I thing here is a miss understanding. What would be something beside ac97? Gimme a real world example plz. According to grep ucb1400 is the driver attached to ac97 bus (well, nothing else matches on ac97_bus_type except the sound & codec thing in sound/ which don't need any extra parameters). Sebastian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html