[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAOesGMi+FOdf53_fYVv2x2ZwuJYYL-x+jdY_0_-STx07QQ+GSw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 23:48:46 -0700
From: Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
To: Bryan Freed <bfreed@...omium.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, keescook@...omium.org,
marco.stornelli@...il.com, grant.likely@...retlab.ca,
anton.vorontsov@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] pstore/ram: Add ramoops support for the Flattened
Device Tree.
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Bryan Freed <bfreed@...omium.org> wrote:
[...]
> +static const struct of_device_id ramoops_of_match[] = {
> + { .compatible = "ramoops", },
> + { },
> +};
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, ramoops_of_match);
> +
> static struct platform_driver ramoops_driver = {
> .remove = __exit_p(ramoops_remove),
> .driver = {
> .name = "ramoops",
> .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> + .of_match_table = ramoops_of_match,
I think you need some of the above to be #ifdef CONFIG_OF + empty
stubs in the else case, and the above assignment should use
of_match_ptr() to wrap the assignment. Take a look at how some of the
other drivers in the kernel handle the OF bindings on platform drivers
for reference.
The bindings look reasonable to me; what they don't cover is where in
the device tree the node should reside. To be honest, I think it's
probably better to leave it fairly vague since different platforms
might prefer different locations -- it's really software configuration
data more than a description of the system hardware.
Besides that, this looks good as far as I am concerned.
-Olof
--
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