At Fri, 25 Apr 2008 14:49:08 +0200, Sebastian Siewior wrote: > > >> What I intended in first place is to allocate a private field in the bus > >> struct so can pass informations to the lower driver. > > > >As mentioned in my earlier mail, I'm fine with your first patch. The > >problem occurs when we generalize it. > Generalize? You mean once you need an array of multiple parameters like > struct ressource where the controler driver and device driver are > independent and don't know each other? Right, that's why void pointer was proposed and I'm against. The controller driver and the device driver are independent and implemented so. If they have the exlusive tight connection, then you must have no problem. But, you can bind any device driver to any controller driver in theory as long as they use the same bus, and there is no check to prevent it. Takashi -- 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
