linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC] c_can_pci: generic module for c

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 5 Jun 2012 15:30:13 +0200
From:	Alessandro Rubini <rubini@...dd.com>
To:	mkl@...gutronix.de
Cc:	bhupesh.sharma@...com, federico.vaga@...il.com,
	alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, wg@...ndegger.com,
	giancarlo.asnaghi@...com, alan@...ux.intel.com,
	linux-can@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] c_can_pci: generic module for c_can on PCI

> I personally like the "pci device sets up a platform device" idea.

Good. Than me or federico will submit a proposal. 

> My question is, is this considered being a good practise?

I don't think there are many pci bridges around, but platform drivers
exists just for that reason: to be instantiated when you know how the
wiring ("platform") details.  I.e., somebody registers the platform
device associated to the driver.

Sometimes the platform device is compiled in, sometimes it comes from
the device tree. I think it can come from PCI as well.

thanks
/alessandro, apologizing with Bhupesh Sharma for his tone in the previous mail
--
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/