On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 7:17 AM, Alexander Shiyan <shc_work@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 5:26 PM, Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > On Thu, 20 Jun 2013 16:49:54 -0700, Bryan Wu <cooloney@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >> Hi Rob,
>> >>
>> >> Is this patch good for merging?
>> >>
>> >> In Alex's one patch to add device tree supporting for a leds driver,
>> >> we got building errors due to miss definitions of some of_xxx api
>> >> functions.
>> >>
>> >> It looks obviously to me that we need to fix this in device tree core
>> >> instead put #ifdef CONFIG_OF everywhere.
>> >
>> > Actually, the reason those things aren't universally defined is to catch
>> > exactly what it caught. The "leds-mc13783: Add devicetree support" patch
>> > interleaves DT and non-DT parsing which isn't generally a good idea. The
>> > DT parsing code should be shuffled off into a separate function and/or
>> > contained with "if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF)) {}".
>> >
>>
>> Agree, reasonable! I will remove this patch from my tree firstly.
>>
>> Alex, could you please update your patch with Grant's feedback?
>
> As far I understand you mean only the last part of patch. Where DT support
> is introduced. Is not it?
>
Yes, exactly. I still keep those 2 non-DT related patches in my tree
and just removed that DT supporting patch.
Please update that patch and posted again to linux-leds and DT
maintainers as well.
Thanks,
-Bryan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-leds" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
