[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAL_JsqJd-Gc-0T+za9UaerLupybwfjzsGKyVYOErngCw3zFvKw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2015 09:51:59 -0500
From: Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com>
To: Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@...il.com>
Cc: Yaniv Gardi <ygardi@...eaurora.org>,
Jej B <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
Santosh Y <santoshsy@...il.com>,
linux-scsi-owner@...r.kernel.org,
Subhash Jadavani <subhashj@...eaurora.org>,
Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>,
Gilad Broner <gbroner@...eaurora.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
Vinayak Holikatti <vinholikatti@...il.com>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <JBottomley@...n.com>,
Dolev Raviv <draviv@...eaurora.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Sujit Reddy Thumma <sthumma@...eaurora.org>,
Raviv Shvili <rshvili@...eaurora.org>,
Sahitya Tummala <stummala@...eaurora.org>,
"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND..." <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] scsi: ufs: probe and init of variant driver from
the platform device
On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@...il.com> wrote:
> Hi Yaniv,
>
> 2015-06-03 18:37 GMT+09:00 Yaniv Gardi <ygardi@...eaurora.org>:
>> @@ -321,7 +313,22 @@ static int ufshcd_pltfrm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> goto out;
>> }
>>
>> - hba->vops = get_variant_ops(&pdev->dev);
>> + err = of_platform_populate(node, NULL, NULL, &pdev->dev);
>> + if (err)
>> + dev_err(&pdev->dev,
>> + "%s: of_platform_populate() failed\n", __func__);
>> +
>> + ufs_variant_node = of_get_next_available_child(node, NULL);
>> +
>> + if (!ufs_variant_node) {
>> + dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "failed to find ufs_variant_node child\n");
>> + } else {
>> + ufs_variant_pdev = of_find_device_by_node(ufs_variant_node);
>> +
>> + if (ufs_variant_pdev)
>> + hba->vops = (struct ufs_hba_variant_ops *)
>> + dev_get_drvdata(&ufs_variant_pdev->dev);
>> + }
>
> I have no strong objection to 'ufs_variant' sub-node. But why can't we
> simply add an of_device_id to ufs_of_match, like below:
But I do have objections on both the naming and having a sub-node.
>
> static const struct of_device_id ufs_of_match[] = {
> { .compatible = "jedec,ufs-1.1"},
> #if IS_ENABLED(SCSI_UFS_QCOM)
> { .compatible = "qcom,ufs", .data = &ufs_hba_qcom_vops },
Be more specific: qcom,<socname>-ufs
> #neidf
Drop the ifdef.
Rob
--
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