On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 12:55:18PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: > > The issue (or one of the issues) in this discussion is that > > Greg does not like the idea of using names or IDs to associate > > PHYs with controllers, because they are too prone to > > duplications or other errors. Pointers are more reliable. > > > > But pointers to what? Since the only data known to be > > available to both the PHY driver and controller driver is the > > platform data, the obvious answer is a pointer to platform data > > (either for the PHY or for the controller, or maybe both). > > hmm.. it's not going to be simple though as the platform device for the PHY and > controller can be created in entirely different places. e.g., in some cases the > PHY device is a child of some mfd core device (the device will be created in > drivers/mfd) and the controller driver (usually) is created in board file. I > guess then we have to come up with something to share a pointer in two > different files. What's wrong with using the platform_data structure that is unique to all boards (see include/platform_data/ for examples)? Isn't that what this structure is there for? greg k-h -- 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
