On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 03:03:31PM +0530, Thomas Abraham wrote:
> - s3c64xx_spi0_set_platdata(&s3c64xx_spi0_pdata, 0, 1);
> + s3c64xx_spi0_set_platdata("s3c6410-spi", NULL, 0, 1);
...
> + pd.src_clk_nr = src_clk_nr;
> + pd.cfg_gpio = (cfg_gpio) ? cfg_gpio : s3c64xx_spi0_cfg_gpio;
> + s3c64xx_device_spi0.name = dev_name;
This looks *really* strange. Why do we need to pass in a name to set in
s3c64xx_device_spi0's name, why would we want to use a different name?
This dev_name also isn't equivalent to dev_name() which makes matters
more confusing than they need to be.
There was similar code for the I2C controllers which caused some really
hard to debug brittleness.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
