> Subject: Re: [RFC 04/20] RDMA/irdma: Add driver framework definitions
>
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 08:02:15PM +0200, gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 04:55:12PM +0000, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 09:45:03AM -0700, Jeff Kirsher wrote:
> > > > +int i40iw_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) {
> > > > + struct i40e_peer_dev_platform_data *pdata =
> > > > + dev_get_platdata(&pdev->dev);
> > > > + struct i40e_info *ldev;
> > >
> > > I thought Greg already said not to use platform_device for this?
> >
> > Yes I did, which is what I thought this whole "use MFD" was supposed
> > to solve. Why is a platform device still being used here?
>
> Looks like when mfd creates the 'multi' devices it creates them as
> platform_devices
>
> /*
> * Given a platform device that's been created by mfd_add_devices(), fetch
> * the mfd_cell that created it.
> */
> static inline const struct mfd_cell *mfd_get_cell(struct platform_device *pdev)
>
> Jason
That's right. We used the MFD framework. mfd_add_devices() registers the child devices
as platform devs. And the function drivers probe() will get a platform dev.
Shiraz
