From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Josh Cartwright Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/3] spmi: Linux driver framework for SPMI Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 14:50:44 -0500 Message-ID: <20130816195044.GI4035@joshc.qualcomm.com> References: <02deef1d90121011ab1df90ad704ef0ee36e2584.1376596224.git.joshc@codeaurora.org> <20130816184614.GA31510@kroah.com> <20130816194714.GH4035@joshc.qualcomm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130816194714.GH4035@joshc.qualcomm.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org To: Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, Gilad Avidov , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring , Michael Bohan , Grant Likely , Sagar Dharia , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 02:47:14PM -0500, Josh Cartwright wrote: > > > > Why? If debugfs isn't enabled, the functions should just compile away > > with the debugfs_() calls, so no need to do this type of thing here, > > right? > > Not sure I follow you, but it may be because this is a bit misleading. > > Currently CONFIG_DEBUG_FS is being extended to also mean "do you want > the SPMI core to create device entries?". It would probably make more debugfs -^ -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755124Ab3HQAFI (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Aug 2013 20:05:08 -0400 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.11.231]:59357 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752758Ab3HQAFE (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Aug 2013 20:05:04 -0400 Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 14:50:44 -0500 From: Josh Cartwright To: Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: Grant Likely , Rob Herring , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, Sagar Dharia , Gilad Avidov , Michael Bohan Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/3] spmi: Linux driver framework for SPMI Message-ID: <20130816195044.GI4035@joshc.qualcomm.com> References: <02deef1d90121011ab1df90ad704ef0ee36e2584.1376596224.git.joshc@codeaurora.org> <20130816184614.GA31510@kroah.com> <20130816194714.GH4035@joshc.qualcomm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130816194714.GH4035@joshc.qualcomm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 02:47:14PM -0500, Josh Cartwright wrote: > > > > Why? If debugfs isn't enabled, the functions should just compile away > > with the debugfs_() calls, so no need to do this type of thing here, > > right? > > Not sure I follow you, but it may be because this is a bit misleading. > > Currently CONFIG_DEBUG_FS is being extended to also mean "do you want > the SPMI core to create device entries?". It would probably make more debugfs -^ -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: joshc@codeaurora.org (Josh Cartwright) Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 14:50:44 -0500 Subject: [PATCH RFC 1/3] spmi: Linux driver framework for SPMI In-Reply-To: <20130816194714.GH4035@joshc.qualcomm.com> References: <02deef1d90121011ab1df90ad704ef0ee36e2584.1376596224.git.joshc@codeaurora.org> <20130816184614.GA31510@kroah.com> <20130816194714.GH4035@joshc.qualcomm.com> Message-ID: <20130816195044.GI4035@joshc.qualcomm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 02:47:14PM -0500, Josh Cartwright wrote: > > > > Why? If debugfs isn't enabled, the functions should just compile away > > with the debugfs_() calls, so no need to do this type of thing here, > > right? > > Not sure I follow you, but it may be because this is a bit misleading. > > Currently CONFIG_DEBUG_FS is being extended to also mean "do you want > the SPMI core to create device entries?". It would probably make more debugfs -^ -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation