On Friday 27 February 2009, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > --- a/drivers/mfd/twl4030-core.c
> > +++ b/drivers/mfd/twl4030-core.c
> > @@ -101,6 +101,12 @@
> > #define twl_has_usb() false
> > #endif
> >
> > +#if defined(CONFIG_INPUT_TWL4030_PWRBUTTON) \
> > + || defined(CONFIG_INPUT_TWL4030_PWBUTTON_MODULE)
>
> OK, this is "wrong". The core shouldn't need to know about specific
> clients.
This is a pretty standard idiom: only create the device
nodes a system actually uses. Applied comprehensively,
the kernel footprint shrinks ... supporting a device can
require a lot of ancillary infrastructure, which may not
need to be compiled in.
> > +#define twl_has_pwrbutton() true
> > +#else
> > +#define twl_has_pwrbutton() false
> > +#endif
> >
> > /* Triton Core internal information (BEGIN) */
> >
> > @@ -526,6 +532,13 @@ add_children(struct twl4030_platform_data *pdata, unsigned long features)
> > usb_transceiver = child;
> > }
> >
> > + if (twl_has_pwrbutton()) {
> > + child = add_child(1, "twl4030_pwrbutton",
> > + NULL, 0, true, pdata->irq_base + 8 + 0, 0);
> > + if (IS_ERR(child))
> > + return PTR_ERR(child);
> > + }
> > +
> > if (twl_has_regulator()) {
> > /*
> > child = add_regulator(TWL4030_REG_VPLL1, pdata->vpll1);
>
> The client module should register itself with the core, rather than the core
> registering the client.
>
> What has gone wrong here?
Not much I can see. It's registering a platform_device,
but only if it could be used on this system. Quite a lot
of OMAP3 boards don't hook up this power button.
Maybe it should also verify that *this* board supports
a power button. A boolean flag in the twl4030 platform
data would suffice, for multi-board kernels.
- Dave
--
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
