[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150513153740.GC11677@kroah.com>
Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 08:37:40 -0700
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, Martin Sperl <kernel@...tin.sperl.org>,
Michal Suchanek <hramrach@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi: Force the registration of the spidev devices
On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 12:26:04PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 10:33:24PM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
>
> > While this is nicer than the DT solution because of its accurate hardware
> > representation, it's still not perfect because you might not have access to the
> > DT, or you might be driving a completely generic device (such as a
> > microcontroller) that might be used for something else in a different
> > context/board.
>
> Greg, you're copied on this because this seems to be a generic problem
> that should perhaps be solved at a driver model level - having a way to
> bind userspace access to devices that we don't otherwise have a driver
> for. The subsystem could specify the UIO driver to use when no other
> driver is available.
That doesn't really work. I've been talking to the ACPI people about
this, and the problem is "don't otherwise have a driver for" is an
impossible thing to prove, as you never know when a driver is going to
be loaded from userspace.
You can easily bind drivers to devices today from userspace, why not
just use the built-in functionality you have today if you "know" that
there is no driver for this hardware.
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