[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4CECCBAE.6080707@stericsson.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 09:24:14 +0100
From: Bengt Jonsson <bengt.g.jonsson@...ricsson.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc: Liam Girdwood <lrg@...mlogic.co.uk>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Linus WALLEIJ <linus.walleij@...ricsson.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mfd: Added new regulator_data pointer to ab8500 board
configuration
On 2010-11-23 19:30, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 07:25:52PM +0100, Bengt Jonsson wrote:
>
>> The ab8500 regulator board configuration will be better separated
>> from the MFD board configuration. This patch adds a void pointer
>> for this purpose.
>
> Adding something completely typesafe seems like a real loss - if you
> want to point to something else at least point to a particular type -
> eg,
>
> struct foo;
>
> struct pdata {
> int other_stuff;
> struct foo *foo;
> };
>
I get your point, I'll try this out.
>> struct regulator_init_data *regulator[AB8500_NUM_REGULATORS];
>> + void *regulator_data;
>
> It'd also help if you could articulate the problem you see with the
> current approach...
The problem I see is that ab8500-core defines the number of regulators
which I can see no reason for. If someone wants to add or remove a
regulator they have to make a change in include/linux/mfd/ab8500.c as
well as in the regulator files.
I will add a better description in an updated patch.
--
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