> I thought the point of this device was that a single [SSP] device > hosted a > pair of multi-function serial interfaces, with each > implementing a > separate function.
function chosen based on what the board needs. Codec interface, SPI, GPIO, etc. If so, then it makes sense for the > base driver to > register child devices of the appropriate kinds. I'd normally say board setup registers them; a "core"driver can't know what children would be needed. But the point I was making was about code factoring not driver setup. When the functions don't have much commonality, they might as well just write to the relevant registers instead of expecting to have a non-register programming interface (of dubious generality of a "core" driver, but much complexity). Easier just to have children use registers directly, in several similar cases. Less overhead, too. - Dave _______________________________________________ Davinci-linux-open-source mailing list [email protected] http://linux.davincidsp.com/mailman/listinfo/davinci-linux-open-source
