[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190926180416.GI19509@mellanox.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2019 18:04:26 +0000
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>
To: "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
"dledford@...hat.com" <dledford@...hat.com>,
Mustafa Ismail <mustafa.ismail@...el.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
Shiraz Saleem <shiraz.saleem@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 04/20] RDMA/irdma: Add driver framework definitions
On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 08:02:15PM +0200, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 04:55:12PM +0000, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 09:45:03AM -0700, Jeff Kirsher wrote:
> > > +int i40iw_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > > +{
> > > + struct i40e_peer_dev_platform_data *pdata =
> > > + dev_get_platdata(&pdev->dev);
> > > + struct i40e_info *ldev;
> >
> > I thought Greg already said not to use platform_device for this?
>
> Yes I did, which is what I thought this whole "use MFD" was supposed to
> solve. Why is a platform device still being used here?
Looks like when mfd creates the 'multi' devices it creates them as
platform_devices
/*
* Given a platform device that's been created by mfd_add_devices(), fetch
* the mfd_cell that created it.
*/
static inline const struct mfd_cell *mfd_get_cell(struct platform_device *pdev)
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists