From: ext Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/17] omap: mailbox: reorganize init Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 18:57:55 +0200 > On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 4:31 PM, Hiroshi DOYU <Hiroshi.DOYU@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> From: ext Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> >>> I'm not familiar with this kind of module loading, but certainly not >>> all systems have udev. >>> >>> I realized the problem because I have a bare-bones system in my >>> beagleboard where I had to manually load mailbox_mach. >> >> With udev or something equivalent, it should work fine. > > But still, you are relying on udev. I don't think we should, and I > don't think there's any need. Some expert may give some comment here..... >>>> The platform device omap2-mailbox accomodatess logical mboxes. >>> >>> Wouldn't it be better the way my patches handle them? >>> * devices.ko: doesn't care about mbox >>> * mach_omap1/mailbox.ko: registers "omap-mailbox" platform device >>> with a list of logical mboxes for OMAP1 >>> * mach_omap2/mailbox.ko: registers "omap-mailbox" platform device >>> with a list of logical mboxes for OMAP2 >>> * plat-omap/mailbox.ko: creates platform driver based on logical list >>> of mboxes from platform device and handles the list internally >>> >>> The end result would be the exactly same, except that there's no hard >>> dependency between the mach, and plat code. >> >> With the attachemnt, which is just 17 lines of code, you will get the >> structure of logical mbox devices, which are located under the single >> platform device, "omap2-mailbox". This is more _descriptive_ since >> it displays the connection of a platform device and logical devices, >> IOW, where these logical ones come. I don't see any point of not using >> this struture. > > That's neat. Am I understanding correctly that that's not an argument > against the split of mailbox_mach and plat mailbox? I may not get your point. That's just 17 lines of code, nothing else. >>>> Would it be possible to rebase them on the top of my coming patch to >>>> get back logical device entry? >>> >>> Where is that? >> >> Attached. Would it be possible to rebase the cleanups on this one? > > I think it would be easier to apply the patch on top of my patch > series... specially since it's so small. Would that be acceptable? I can pick up some of your cleanups if applied on the previous attachemnt. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
