[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130816185256.GC31510@kroah.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 11:52:56 -0700
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Josh Cartwright <joshc@...eaurora.org>
Cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
Sagar Dharia <sdharia@...eaurora.org>,
Gilad Avidov <gavidov@...eaurora.org>,
Michael Bohan <mbohan@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/3] spmi: Add MSM PMIC Arbiter SPMI controller
On Fri, Aug 09, 2013 at 01:37:07PM -0700, Josh Cartwright wrote:
> +struct spmi_pmic_arb_dev {
> + struct spmi_controller controller;
> + struct device *dev;
> + struct device *slave;
This is problematic.
Why do you have the driver "own" the controller? What is dev for,
there's already a struct device within the controller. Same for slave,
what is it?
You have 3 struct devices here, which one controls the lifecycle of the
object (hint, I know the answer, but I think it's wrong...)
thanks,
greg k-h
--
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