On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 07:24:41PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote: > > > If we did that, serial8250_probe() would automatically do the right thing. > > > > Take a look at the way arch/powerpc/platforms/512x/pdm360ng.c uses a > > notifier for amending a platform_device with additional data.. > > I tend to view arch specific embedded code as rather like very dubious > parties. What goes on in other peoples' house out of sight is none of my > business. > > The 8250 however is core code so it should keep its clothers on and behave > in a manner befitting its status. > > What part of the problem can't be solved by doing it properly using the > device registration interfaces we have today ? Device registration isn't the problem. The problem is supplying machine-specific callbacks from the board support code to the drivers. When devices are sourced from a device tree, it is easy to get data about the device out of the tree, but it is really hard to get callback pointers. To make it all work without this fiddling about, the octeon serial_{in,out} implementation would need to be rolled into of_serial.c (which FWIW, I have absolutely no problem with). g. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-serial" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html