From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755226Ab2HaXWl (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Aug 2012 19:22:41 -0400 Received: from mail-pb0-f46.google.com ([209.85.160.46]:64996 "EHLO mail-pb0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755170Ab2HaXWk (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 Aug 2012 19:22:40 -0400 Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2012 16:22:34 -0700 From: Dmitry Torokhov To: Mathieu Poirier Cc: Alan Cox , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rdunlap@xenotime.net, arve@android.com, kernel-team@android.com, john.stultz@linaro.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] drivers/tty: Folding Android's keyreset driver in sysRQ Message-ID: <20120831232234.GB22142@core.coreip.homeip.net> References: <1346365854-28441-1-git-send-email-mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> <20120830230129.GC21501@core.coreip.homeip.net> <50413200.5010104@linaro.org> <20120831230227.6e5008b5@pyramind.ukuu.org.uk> <20120831224128.GA22073@core.coreip.homeip.net> <50414140.60102@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <50414140.60102@linaro.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 04:57:04PM -0600, Mathieu Poirier wrote: > On 12-08-31 04:41 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 11:02:27PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > >>>> Why do we need to involve a platform device and not use, for example, a module > >>>> parameter, that could be set up from userspace? > >>> > >>> The platform device comes from the original design and was included to > >>> minimise the amount of changes in code that make use of the current > >>> keyreset driver. > >> > >> The platform device is IMHO the right answer. In this class of devices > >> the stuff is compiled in, the userspace is Android, there are no modules > >> and there is no reason for it to be configurable. > > > > It does not matter if it is built in or not, /sys/module/XXX/parameters > > is still there, and while havig it in kernel is "easy" you could as > > easily stuff needed data into a sysfs attribute during booting. > > > > And we should be able to get this from DT even without the platform > > device (this was the next step, wasn't it?). > > Correct - my hope was to get the main functionality accepted before > adding DT support. Do you think the lack of DT support is a blocker for > acceptance ? Please confirm. > No, lack of DT is not a blocker, but I am unconvinced that we need platform device. Thanks, -- Dmitry