Hi Greg, On Aug 6, 2013, at 12:36 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 10:53:40AM +0300, Pantelis Antoniou wrote: >> Platform device removal uncovered a number of problems with >> the way resources are handled in the core platform code. >> >> Resources now form child/parent linkages and this requires >> proper linking of the resources. On top of that the OF core >> directly creates it's own platform devices. Simplify things >> by providing helper functions that manage the linking properly. > > Ugh, the OF core shouldn't be creating platform devices. Well, yes, I > know it does that today, but ick, ick, ick. > Yep, ick, ick, ick is the correct form. >> Two functions are provided: >> >> platform_device_link_resources(), which links all the >> linkable resources (if not already linked). >> >> and platform_device_unlink_resources(), which unlinks all the >> resources. > > Why would anyone need to call this? I'm getting the feeling that OF > should just have it's own bus of devices to handle this type of mess. > ACPI is going through the same rewrite for this same type of problem > (they did things differently.) I suggest you work with the ACPI > developers to so the same thing they are, to solve it correctly for > everyone. > It's the same problem really. Another bus type might not fly well. The same device driver should be (in theory) be made to work unchanged either on an OF/ACPI/Fex( :) ) setup. What would it take to move all this into driver core? > thanks, > > greg k-h Regards -- Pantelis -- 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
