From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from service87.mimecast.com ([94.185.240.25]) by canuck.infradead.org with smtp (Exim 4.76 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1QLzUx-0007P8-Ss for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 16 May 2011 15:14:20 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 8/8] MTD: physmap: let set_vpp() pass a platform_device instead of a map_info From: Marc Zyngier To: Eric Miao In-Reply-To: References: <1305557977-16871-1-git-send-email-marc.zyngier@arm.com> <1305557977-16871-9-git-send-email-marc.zyngier@arm.com> Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 16:14:56 +0100 Message-ID: <1305558896.30788.15.camel@e102391-lin.cambridge.arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Russell King , Ben Dooks , David Woodhouse , Nicolas Ferre , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, Philipp Zabel , Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard , Andrew Victor , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 23:06 +0800, Eric Miao wrote: > On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 10:59 PM, Marc Zyngier wro= te: > > The set_vpp() method provided by physmap passes a map_info back to > > the platform code, which has little relevance as far as the platform > > is concerned (this parameter is completely unused). > > > > Instead, pass the platform_device, which can be used in the pismo > > driver to retrieve some important information in a nicer way, instead > > of the hack that was in place. >=20 > Not really sure if a 'struct device' would be more generic here, though t= his > case is simply a 'struct platform_device'. While I agree that 'struct device' is more generic, physmap only knows about platform_devices. Should another device type be added to physmap, this would make sense. But at the moment I'd like to limit the code churn to what is strictly necessary. Cheers, =09M. --=20 Reality is an implementation detail. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marc.Zyngier@arm.com (Marc Zyngier) Date: Mon, 16 May 2011 16:14:56 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v5 8/8] MTD: physmap: let set_vpp() pass a platform_device instead of a map_info In-Reply-To: References: <1305557977-16871-1-git-send-email-marc.zyngier@arm.com> <1305557977-16871-9-git-send-email-marc.zyngier@arm.com> Message-ID: <1305558896.30788.15.camel@e102391-lin.cambridge.arm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 23:06 +0800, Eric Miao wrote: > On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 10:59 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > The set_vpp() method provided by physmap passes a map_info back to > > the platform code, which has little relevance as far as the platform > > is concerned (this parameter is completely unused). > > > > Instead, pass the platform_device, which can be used in the pismo > > driver to retrieve some important information in a nicer way, instead > > of the hack that was in place. > > Not really sure if a 'struct device' would be more generic here, though this > case is simply a 'struct platform_device'. While I agree that 'struct device' is more generic, physmap only knows about platform_devices. Should another device type be added to physmap, this would make sense. But at the moment I'd like to limit the code churn to what is strictly necessary. Cheers, M. -- Reality is an implementation detail.