On Fri, Jul 12, 2024 at 08:41:58AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 12, 2024, at 07:31, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > @@ -684,6 +685,7 @@ struct platform_device pxa27x_device_gpio = {
> > .platform_data = &pxa2xx_gpio_info,
> > },
> > };
> > +#endif /* CONFIG_PXA25x || CONFIG_PXA27x */
> >
> > static struct resource pxa_dma_resource[] = {
> > [0] = {
> >
> > If you are OK with this I'll submit proper patch.
>
> Right, that's probably the easiest way. I was trying a more
> elaborate change (see below), but there is a good chance I
> introduce another regression in that, so let's go with
> your patch. Please send it directly to soc@xxxxxxxxxx
> Cc:linux-arm-kernel and I'll pick it up.
Done.
>
> One more thing I noticed: if you are doing more patches
> to convert devices in board files to use software nodes,
> we should probably try to move them away from static
> platform_device definitions towards a dynamic
> platform_device_register_simple() or similar interface
> at the same time.
Sometimes platform_device_register_full() which operates on
platform_device_info structure is very handy, but in general
what is the issue with statically defined devices (when they
are never unregistered)?
Thanks.
--
Dmitry
