On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 8:57 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Monday 02 July 2012, Vinayak Holikatti wrote:
>> +static struct platform_driver ufshcd_pltfrm_driver = {
>> + .probe = ufshcd_pltfrm_probe,
>> + .remove = __devexit_p(ufshcd_pltfrm_remove),
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_PM
>> + .suspend = ufshcd_pltfrm_suspend,
>> + .resume = ufshcd_pltfrm_resume,
>> +#endif
>> + .driver = {
>> + .name = "ufshcd",
>> + .owner = THIS_MODULE,
>> + },
>> +};
>
> Hi Vinayak,
>
> Please add a device tree match table here to allow the driver to be
> used by modern platforms that only do device tree based hardware
> detection. Just look in other drivers for existing uses of
> "of_match_table" to be used.
>
> I'm not sure what the "compatible" string should be in this case,
> because the it matches a JEDEC specification, not a particular
> vendor's implementation of it. The match table can have multiple
> entries, which is useful if you have multiple implementations
> that are slightly different or don't fully conform to the spec.
>
> Maybe a list like
>
> static const struct of_device_id ufs_of_match[] = {
> { .compatible = "jedec,ufs-1.1" },
> }
>
> would be enough for now.
Ok, will implement device tree match table.
>
> Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
