On Fri, 27 Nov 2009, Antonio Ospite wrote: > On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 15:06:53 +0100 (CET) > Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Tue, 17 Nov 2009, Antonio Ospite wrote: > > > > > pxa_camera init() callback is sometimes abused to setup MFP for PXA CIF, or > > > even to request GPIOs to be used by the camera *sensor*. These initializations > > > can be performed statically in machine init functions. > > > > > > The current semantics for this init() callback is ambiguous anyways, it is > > > invoked in pxa_camera_activate(), hence at device node open, but its users use > > > it like a generic initialization to be done at module init time (configure > > > MFP, request GPIOs for *sensor* control). > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Antonio Ospite <ospite@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Antonio, to make the merging easier and avoid imposing extra dependencies, > > I would postpone this to 2.6.34, and just remove uses of .init() by > > pxa-camera users as per your other two patches. Would this be ok with you? > > > > Thanks > > Guennadi > > > > Perfectly fine with me. > > Feel also free to anticipate me and edit the commit messages to > whatever you want in the first two patches. Now that we aren't removing > init() immediately after these it makes even more sense to change the > phrasing from a future referencing > "init() is going to be removed" > to a more present focused > "better not to use init() at all" > form. I cannot edit those subject lines, because I will not be handling those patches, they will go via the PXA tree, that's why it is easier to wait with the pxa patch. Thanks Guennadi --- Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D. Freelance Open-Source Software Developer http://www.open-technology.de/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
