On 06/29/12 01:13, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> In this case, I was more wondering between using a class to a device type. >> >>> I recall seeing a thread where >>> someone said classes were on the way out and shouldn't be used but I >>> can't find it anymore. >> I also remembered a similar discussion at a plumbers mini-conf about >> 2-3 years ago too, so I looked at device_type as an alternative to >> class. The former looks somewhat simpler, but I couldn't find any >> major advantage for using one over the other, and both seem to be in >> use by many subsystems. > Moving to device_type is so trivial that I gave it a spin (and moved > to IDA too while at it): Great! It looks like device_type doesn't have any list iteration support though. Is that requirement gone? If that requirement is still there I would think we need something like a class or bus still. Will you resend this as part of a series? It will be easier to review then. -- Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum. -- 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
