"Magnus Damm" <magnus.damm@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 8:13 AM, Kevin Hilman ><khilman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Eric Miao <eric.y.miao@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >>> On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 7:28 AM, Kevin Hilman >>> <khilman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> Mikael Pettersson wrote: >>>>> Eric Miao writes: >>>>> > On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 9:50 AM, Kevin Hilman >>>>> > <khilman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> > > On ARM platforms, power management can be very platform specific. >>>>> > > This patch allows ARM subarches to extend the platform_device >>>>> > > pdev_archdata for each subarch by creating a new struct pdev_machdata >>>>> > > and allowing each subarch to customize it as needed. > >[snip] > >> OK, after no further comments, sending this patch to the patch system. > >Hi Kevin, > >Thanks for your work on this. I found this patch marked as superseeded >in the tracker here: > >http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/developer/patches/viewpatch.php?id=5773/1 > >I'd now like to use struct pdev_archdata myself on mach-shmobile, so >almost a year later I wonder why this patch didn't make it. > >I realize that you use struct omap_device instead of struct >pdev_archdata. I prefer not to wrap if possible. This because I'd like >to reuse already existing drivers and PM code with the SuperH >architecture. > >Do you remember what happened with this patch? I don't have all the details in front of me because I'm on my phone, but I advised against pdev_archdata because it is multiplatform-unfriendly. g. -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
