On 9/19/2011 3:11 PM, Cousson, Benoit wrote:
On 9/17/2011 6:05 PM, Grant Likely wrote:
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 04:43:18PM +0200, Benoit Cousson wrote:
[...]
- pr_debug("omap_device: %s: building with %d hwmods\n", pdev_name,
- oh_cnt);
+ /* Set the dev_name early to allow dev_xxx in omap_device_alloc */
+ if (pdev->id != -1)
+ dev_set_name(&pdev->dev, "%s.%d", pdev->name, pdev->id);
+ else
+ dev_set_name(&pdev->dev, "%s", pdev->name);
This is duplicated from the core platform_device code. What is the
reasoning for doing it again here?
Well, it is written in the comment... But this is maybe not that obvious
:-)
That part is only needed for the legacy path that will create a
omap_device before having created the device, and thus at that time the
dev_xxx will not give the device name. This is not a big deal, but that
was painful for the debug.
That being said, by writing that, I'm now realizing that this is due to
the way the legacy code was working, because I didn't try to change the
sequence.
But maybe, I can easily avoid that by changing the original sequence.
In fact If I create the omap_device after the omap_device_register, the
platform_device will already have the correct name...
That should work, I'll give it a try.
Mmm, that's funny because it still does require to copy some part of the
platform_device_add to make that work.
This is now the resource name that are missing in that case :-(
So I will have to add at least that part to make that work:
if (r->name == NULL)
r->name = dev_name(&pdev->dev);
And the real function is doing s little bit more:
p = r->parent;
if (!p) {
if (resource_type(r) == IORESOURCE_MEM)
p = &iomem_resource;
else if (resource_type(r) == IORESOURCE_IO)
p = &ioport_resource;
}
if (p && insert_resource(p, r)) {
printk(KERN_ERR
"%s: failed to claim resource %d\n",
dev_name(&pdev->dev), i);
ret = -EBUSY;
goto failed;
}
It seems that in both cases, some part of the platform core code has to
be copied to make that work properly.
Except if someone has a better idea, I'd rather stick to the original
dev_set_name hack. Considering that this code should be removed at some
point anyway.
Any thoughts?
Regards,
Benoit
--
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
