[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACRpkdYAvhaH6+L8J0sdQd7vYzrAioFhUZAcu2eB6t2hRK0L9Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2018 12:55:15 -0700
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Linux Input <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/5] Support children for legacy device properties
On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 11:16 AM Dmitry Torokhov
<dmitry.torokhov@...il.com> wrote:
> The generic device properties APIs are very helpful as they allow abstracting
> away details of the platform (whether it is ACPI, device tree, or legacy board
> file), so that individual driver does not need separate code paths to support
> all variants. However there are drivers that currently can not use generic
> device properties API as they need notion of children properties, for example
> gpio_keys driver, that expects every button to be described as a sub-node of
> main device.
>
> This patch series introduces notion of sub-nodes for static properties and ties
> it up with GPIO lookup tables so that they are usable with sub-nodes as well.
This is the patch series I would have written, had I been smart enough.
Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
for the series.
I can't test the SIM.ONE board with this until next week but the approach
is definately what we want, not just for legacy boards, but also for any
other non-discoverable hardware we currently poke into
drivers/platform or arch/x86/platform etc.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
Yours,
Linus Walleij
Powered by blists - more mailing lists