[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20141008181314.GC14423@dtor-ws>
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 11:13:14 -0700
From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
To: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
Cc: "Ivan T. Ivanov" <iivanov@...sol.com>, linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] Input: pmic8xxx-keypad - use regmap_field for
register access
On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 11:00:07AM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> On 10/08/2014 02:30 AM, Ivan T. Ivanov wrote:
> >On Wed, 2014-10-08 at 12:13 +0300, Ivan T. Ivanov wrote:
> >>On Tue, 2014-10-07 at 10:26 -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> >>>Hi Ivan,
> >>>
> >>>On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 12:50:46PM +0300, Ivan T. Ivanov wrote:
> >>>>@@ -527,10 +538,55 @@ static int pmic8xxx_kp_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >>>>+
> >>>>+ kp->row_hold = devm_regmap_field_alloc(kp->dev, kp->regmap,
> >>>>+ info->row_hold);
> >>>>+ if (IS_ERR(kp->row_hold))
> >>>>+ return PTR_ERR(kp->row_hold);
> >>>Why do we have to allocate all regmap fields separately instead of
> >>>embedding them into keypad structure?
> >>>
> >>No particular reason. Will rework it.
> >>
> >Oops. struct regmap_field is opaque. It seems that the allocation
> >is the only way that I could have instance of it.
> >
>
> Maybe we can add an API to allocate an array of fields?
Maybe we could make the structure public instead? I do not see any
reason for allocating something separately that has exactly the same
lifetime as owning structure.
Thanks.
--
Dmitry
--
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