From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Srinivas Kandagatla Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 03/11] nvmem: Add a simple NVMEM framework for nvmem providers Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 11:05:46 +0100 Message-ID: <558A80FA.3020603@linaro.org> References: <1432226535-8640-1-git-send-email-srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org> <1432226583-8775-1-git-send-email-srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org> <5580A678.4080304@codeaurora.org> <5582BDAE.5040008@linaro.org> <5589F8C2.3030502@codeaurora.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-wi0-f172.google.com ([209.85.212.172]:37872 "EHLO mail-wi0-f172.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752218AbbFXKFx (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Jun 2015 06:05:53 -0400 Received: by wicgi11 with SMTP id gi11so41415729wic.0 for ; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 03:05:52 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5589F8C2.3030502@codeaurora.org> Sender: linux-arm-msm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org To: Stephen Boyd , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Cc: Maxime Ripard , Rob Herring , Kumar Gala , Mark Brown , s.hauer@pengutronix.de, Greg Kroah-Hartman , linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de, pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com, mporter@konsulko.com On 24/06/15 01:24, Stephen Boyd wrote: > Can you assign the attributes to the device_type in the nvmem::struct > device? I don't see why these attributes need to be part of the class. > I will fix this. >>> >> >>>> >>>+{ >>>> >>>+ return class_register(&nvmem_class); >>> >> >>> >>I thought class was on the way out? Aren't we supposed to use bus types >>> >>for new stuff? >> >Do you remember any conversation on the list about this? I could not >> >find it on web. >> > >> >on the other hand, nvmem is not really a bus, making it a bus type >> >sounds incorrect to me. >> > > I found this post on the cpu class that Sudeep tried to introduce[1]. > And there's this post from Kay that alludes to a unification of busses > and classes[2]. And some other post where Kay says class is dead [3]. Thanks for the links, Yep, looks like Class is dead, I will change the code to use bus type instead. > > [1]https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/21/191 > [2]https://lwn.net/Articles/471821/ > [3]https://lkml.org/lkml/2010/11/11/17 --srini