On Tuesday 07 October 2008, Peter 'p2' De Schrijver wrote:
>
> Signed-off-by: Peter 'p2' De Schrijver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ---
> drivers/i2c/chips/twl4030-power.c | 290
> +++++++++++++++----------------------
> include/linux/i2c/twl4030.h | 64 ++++++++
> 2 files changed, 181 insertions(+), 173 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/chips/twl4030-power.c
> b/drivers/i2c/chips/twl4030-power.c
> index cb325b0..4a543a2 100644
> --- a/drivers/i2c/chips/twl4030-power.c
> +++ b/drivers/i2c/chips/twl4030-power.c
> -#if defined(CONFIG_MACH_OMAP_3430SDP) ||
> defined(CONFIG_MACH_OMAP_3430LABRADOR)
> -
> - ...
> -#else
> -struct triton_ins sleep_on_seq[] __initdata = {
> - {MSG_BROADCAST(DEV_GRP_NULL, RES_GRP_RC, RES_TYPE_ALL, RES_TYPE2_R0,
> - RES_STATE_SLEEP), 4},
> - {MSG_BROADCAST(DEV_GRP_NULL, RES_GRP_ALL, RES_TYPE_ALL, RES_TYPE2_R0,
> - RES_STATE_SLEEP), 4},
> -};
> -
> -struct triton_ins sleep_off_seq[] __initdata = {
> - {MSG_SINGULAR(DEV_GRP_NULL, 0x17, RES_STATE_ACTIVE), 0x30},
> - {MSG_BROADCAST(DEV_GRP_NULL, RES_GRP_PP_PR, RES_TYPE_ALL, RES_TYPE2_R0,
> - RES_STATE_ACTIVE), 0x37},
> - {MSG_BROADCAST(DEV_GRP_NULL, RES_GRP_ALL, RES_TYPE_ALL, RES_TYPE2_R0,
> - RES_STATE_ACTIVE), 0x2},
> -};
> -
> -struct triton_ins t2_wrst_seq[] __initdata = { };
> -
> -#endif
Your set of patches seems to have discarded support for quite
a few platforms. I don't quite know the details of what these
PM scripts are doing ... could they be misbehaving on Beagle,
so that they explain why "reboot" on RC8 fails?
> +static int __init twl4030_power_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
Pretty much everything here is "init" code, which is fine;
I like seeing smaller runtime images. But:
>
> @@ -340,4 +271,17 @@ static int __init twl4030_power_init(void)
>
> }
>
> +static struct platform_driver twl4030_power = {
> + .probe = twl4030_power_probe,
> + .driver = {
> + .name = "twl4030_power",
> + .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> + },
> +};
> +
> +static int __init twl4030_power_init(void)
> +{
> + return platform_driver_register(&twl4030_power);
... in that case, why not platform_driver_probe(), so there's
not even a whiff of a notion that this driver remain init is
done?
And I can't help but wonder why this isn't just part of
the twl4030-core code, without even a platform device/driver.
I didn't move it to drivers/mfd because it seemed almost all
SDP-specific. But to the extent that it's something generic
and "part of the core", maybe that's where it should be.
Not necessarily part of the same file.
- Dave
> +}
> +
> module_init(twl4030_power_init);
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
