[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f17812d70808221802t250e4210y826a635d6e9688ed@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 21:02:35 -0400
From: "Eric Miao" <eric.y.miao@...il.com>
To: "Jon Smirl" <jonsmirl@...il.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Fundamental Design Flaw of the Device Driver Model?
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 10:33 AM, Jon Smirl <jonsmirl@...il.com> wrote:
> On 8/22/08, Eric Miao <eric.y.miao@...il.com> wrote:
> ======================================================
>> This, however, creates many questions you have to face with:
>>
>> 1. on what bus shall these sub-devices be?
>> ** this is the reason I choose to use "platform_device", at least they
>> can reside on the platform_bus_type, thus platform_driver can be used
>> for this sub-device
>
> Another option is making your own bus. If I understand your hardware
> it effectively has an internal bus.
>
That's another option around, but it didn't solve my fundamental question
of, (e.g. an PCI card with multiple network interfaces and other functionality):
Why should I have to create an intermediate device provided that a
"struct net_device" already contains a "struct device"? And that
device-driver binding, parameter passing (platform_data), bus and
other functionalities of this "struct net_device" is not used while
that's used solely by that intermediate device (platform_device maybe)?
They should have perfectly been combined into a single virtual device.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists