On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 8:04 AM, Wolfram Sang <w.s...@pengutronix.de> wrote: > As Anton introduced archdata support, I wondered if this is a suitable way to > handle the platform_data/devicetree_property-dualism (at least for some > drivers).
I think in general, this is the right direction; but I'm not convinced that the right pattern or form has been found yet. What I don't like on this particular patch is that it still hooks of-specific stuff into an arbitrary point in the probe routine. I'd like to see some pattern for retrieving or populating a platform_data structure when one isn't already provided, and regardless of the data source. So, I guess I'm saying that I agree with the approach, but I think a better pattern would be to factor out all of the platform_data fetching code into a separate function and keep probe() focused on initializing the device based on a pdata structure returned by it. It will take a bit of experimentation to come up with the best form for the pdata fetching function, but it will be better contained if it is all at a single place. g. -- Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng. Secret Lab Technologies Ltd. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
