On 03/12/2013 06:59 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 12 March 2013, Danny Huang wrote:
>>
>> +void __init tegra_soc_device_init(void)
>> +{
>> + struct soc_device *soc_dev;
>> + struct soc_device_attribute *soc_dev_attr;
>> +
>> + soc_dev_attr = kzalloc(sizeof(*soc_dev_attr), GFP_KERNEL);
>> + if (!soc_dev_attr)
>> + return;
>> +
>> + soc_dev_attr->soc_id = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "%d", tegra_chip_id);
>> + soc_dev_attr->revision = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "%d", tegra_revision);
>> + soc_dev_attr->family = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "Tegra");
>> +
>> + soc_dev = soc_device_register(soc_dev_attr);
>> + if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(soc_dev))
>> + kfree(soc_dev_attr);
>> +
>> + return;
>
> You are dropping the soc_dev on the floor here by just returning.
>
> The idea of the soc node is to have all on-soc components be children
> of that node, so you should instead pass it into of_platform_populate
> as the parent device.
Tegra DTs don't have a separate node for on-soc vs. off-soc components.
Wouldn't passing soc_dev into of_platform_populate() make everything a
child of this soc_dev; is that what we want?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
