* Alan Stern | 2011-08-25 13:39:25 [-0400]: >It wouldn't have to be linked to every ehci-<arch>.o; only the one >that the kernel is configured for. Right now you can't build more than >one of them, right? Otherwise there would be multiple definitions for >the PLATFORM_DRIVER symbol. > >For that matter, why does ehci-hcd.c have separate code for registering >OF_PLATFORM_DRIVER and XILINX_OF_PLATFORM_DRIVER? Why don't they use >the same old PLATFORM_DRIVER symbol as everything else? The first drop of the xilinx code was based on platform device. Arnd told them to use device tree and so they did. I think that they did not convert everything and left it as it with the extra registration routine. Later the separate OF probing got merged into OF. At this point the code could be merged into a single platform probe. I've been looking into ehci-* shortly and it does not seem to be that big a deal. If you ignore PM for a while than the only thing that differs is the reset/setup callback where some of the chip need extra love. The remaining part where you do register, obtain memory address, get irq, register hcd and so on is nearly identical. So right now I think it can be merged :) >Alan Stern Sebastian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
