On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 11:16 AM, Kevin Hilman
<khilman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Omar Ramirez Luna <omar.ramirez@xxxxxx> writes:
>
>> Patch "OMAP: hwmod/device: add omap_{device, hwmod}_get_mpu_rt_va"[1],
>> introduces omap_device_get_rt_va which is meant to be called
>> by drivers to retrieve the _mpu_rt_va, however this function
>> receives a pointer to an omap_device; since there is no
>> practical way for a driver to get this parameter without
>> fiddling with pdev and container_of macro, and omap_device code
>> already does this, it is better for it to handle this case.
>>
>> Also moved header declaration to appear in the set of
>> functions to be used by drivers, as per the comment there.
>>
>> [1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-omap&m=127808467703366&w=2
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Omar Ramirez Luna <omar.ramirez@xxxxxx>
>
> Looks right, since all the other driver-accessible functions take a
> platform_device pointer, not an omap_device pointer.
>
> Acked-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> However, I thing the subject/shortlog should be clearer. IMO, this
> patch makes the API more consistent rather than making it easier.
> Also, subject prefix should be preferrably 'OMAP: omap_device:'.
I saw few patches following the convention "OMAP: device" that's why I
followed that one, I will change the subject/changelog according to
your suggestions.
Thanks,
Omar
--
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
